This dissertation focuses on employing both empirical and normative methodologies to answer questions at the intersection of marketing, law, and ethics. The first chapter focuses on how federal and state law treats trademark dilution laws. Using traditional branding theory and consumer psychology methods, I argue that federal law is misguided and must be re-formulated. The second chapter seeks to better understand the implications of brands publicly taking political and social stands. In particular, it argues that consumer boycotts in response to these brands serve an important role in the marketplace of ideas and it provides a research agenda for marketers to better understand these so-called consumer boycotts. The third and final chapter seeks to criticize the common marketing practice of catering to consumer preferences. Marketers are often pre-occupied with these preferences and therefore prioritize them even if they create cultural harms. This harm often accrues to those who are not the target demographic of the marketing strategy. As such, paradoxically, marketing should seek to be critical of consumer preferences in some contexts.