In the 1991 case of Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a restaurant's distinctive décor could be protected under trademark law even without proof that it had acquired secondary meaning. The dispute arose when Taco Cabana sued Two Pesos for copying its festive eating atmosphere characterized by artifacts, bright colors and lights to create a fast-food Mexican environment in their restaurants. The court held that such trade dress was inherently distinctive and capable of being protected as long as it is non-functional - not essential to use or purpose of the product or affects cost/quality - which would allow competitors to compete effectively without imitation.

In the dissenting opinion for TWO PESOS, INC. v. TACO CABANA, INC., Justice Stevens argued that a restaurant's décor should not be considered inherently distinctive and therefore eligible for trade dress protection under the Lanham Act without proof of secondary meaning. He reasoned that granting such automatic protection could potentially stifle competition by allowing businesses to monopolize certain styles or themes in their industries. Furthermore, he expressed concern about how courts would determine what constitutes a "distinctive" design deserving of this protection and warned against turning judges into aesthetic experts. He also pointed out inconsistencies in the majority's reasoning regarding whether Taco Cabana's décor was indeed unique enough to warrant trade dress status.