<P> This court has unequivocally held that streets are proper places for the exercise of the freedom of communicating information and disseminating opinion and that, though the states and municipalities may appropriately regulate the privilege in the public interest, they may not unduly burden or proscribe its employment in their public thoroughfares . We are equally clear that the Constitution imposes no such restraint on government as respects purely commercial advertising . </P> <P> In Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976), the Court overruled Valentine and ruled that commercial speech was entitled to First Amendment protection: </P> <P> What is at issue is whether a State may completely suppress the dissemination of concededly truthful information about entirely lawful activity, fearful of that information's effect upon its disseminators and its recipients...(W) e conclude that the answer to this one is in the negative . </P> <P> In Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association (1978), the Court ruled that commercial speech was not protected by the First Amendment as much as other types of speech: </P>

Right to vote freedom of expression freedom of the press