TY - JOUR
T1 - Abortion disclosure laws and the first amendment
T2 - The broader public health implications of the supreme Court's becerra decision
AU - Pomeranz, Jennifer L.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Public Health Association Inc.. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - In 2018, the US Supreme Court analyzedaCalifornia staterequirement that clinics serving pregnant women must provide government notices-1 for licensedclinics about theavailability of state health services including abortion and 1 for unlicensed clinics, notifying potential clients that the clinics are not licensed medical facilities and have no licensed medical professionals on-site. The Supreme Court found that both notices violated the First Amendment rights of the clinics. The Supreme Court's opinion elicits new uncertainties about the government's ability to require the disclosure of factual information in the context of reproductive health services and more broadly in the commercial context. However, the Supreme Court's silence on 1 of the state's purposes for theunlicensed clinic notice,which was to address deceptive speech by the clinics, highlights a potential avenue for future regulation. Policymakers can require the disclosure of factual information in the commercial context specifically to prevent consumer deception consistent with the First Amendment. Public health researchers can generate evidence to support such disclosure requirements intended to protect health and safety.
AB - In 2018, the US Supreme Court analyzedaCalifornia staterequirement that clinics serving pregnant women must provide government notices-1 for licensedclinics about theavailability of state health services including abortion and 1 for unlicensed clinics, notifying potential clients that the clinics are not licensed medical facilities and have no licensed medical professionals on-site. The Supreme Court found that both notices violated the First Amendment rights of the clinics. The Supreme Court's opinion elicits new uncertainties about the government's ability to require the disclosure of factual information in the context of reproductive health services and more broadly in the commercial context. However, the Supreme Court's silence on 1 of the state's purposes for theunlicensed clinic notice,which was to address deceptive speech by the clinics, highlights a potential avenue for future regulation. Policymakers can require the disclosure of factual information in the commercial context specifically to prevent consumer deception consistent with the First Amendment. Public health researchers can generate evidence to support such disclosure requirements intended to protect health and safety.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061132047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061132047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304871
DO - 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304871
M3 - Article
C2 - 30676798
AN - SCOPUS:85061132047
SN - 0090-0036
VL - 109
SP - 412
EP - 418
JO - American journal of public health
JF - American journal of public health
IS - 3
ER -