“If doctors are scared of losing their licenses for giving advice that they think is helpful and appropriate, but they don’t quite know what the law means, they will be less likely to speak openly and frankly with their patients,” said Hannah Kieschnick, an attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. The Northern California affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, has weighed in against the law on free speech grounds, though the national organization has affirmed the constitutionality of COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Leana Wen, a health policy professor at George Washington University who previously served as president of Planned Parenthood and as Baltimore’s health commissioner, wrote in an op-ed a few weeks before Newsom signed the law that it would exert “a chilling effect on medical practice, with widespread repercussions that could paradoxically worsen patient care.” Kennedy Jr., who has questioned the science and safety of vaccines for years.īut doubts about the law are not confined to those who have battled the scientific mainstream.ĭr. 1, is being challenged by vaccine skeptics and civil liberties groups.Īmong those suing to get the law declared unconstitutional is a group founded by Robert F. The legal fight in the nation’s most populous state is to some extent a perpetuation of the pandemic-era tussle pitting supporters of public health guidelines against groups and individuals who resisted masking orders, school shutdowns and vaccine mandates.Ĭalifornia’s COVID-19 misinformation law, which took effect Jan. District Judge Fred Slaughter refused to halt the law and said it was “likely to promote the health and safety of California COVID-19 patients.” His ruling last month clashed with one handed down in Santa Ana in December in that case, U.S. Shubb said the law was “unconstitutionally vague,” in part because it “fails to provide a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of what is prohibited.” District Judge William Shubb in Sacramento issued a temporary halt on enforcing the law, but it applies only to the plaintiffs in those cases. Yet the law - meant to discipline doctors who give patients false information about COVID-19 - is now in legal limbo after two federal judges issued conflicting rulings in recent lawsuits that say it violates free speech and is too vague for doctors to know what it bars them from telling patients. ![]() In a message to lawmakers, the governor warned of “the chilling effect other potential laws may have” on the ability of doctors to speak frankly with patients but expressed confidence that the one he was signing did not cross that line. Gavin Newsom may have been prescient when he acknowledged free speech concerns as he signed California’s COVID-19 misinformation bill last fall. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |