This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

U.S. Supreme Court,
Constitutional Law

Mar. 23, 2018

'NIFLA v. Becerra' Panel

Four amici from the First Amendment challenge to a California abortion disclosure law discuss what they consider the case's most salient constitutional points: the (non-existent?) Professional Speech Doctrine; potentially diluted strict scrutiny; the ubiquity of disclosures like California's, and the sweeping implications were it felled; and what is meant by 'informed consent?' Guests include Robert McNamara (Institute for Justice), Brianne Gorod (Constitutional Accountability Center), Steven Aden (Americans United for Life), and John Baker (Greene Espel)

Robert McNamara

Brianne Gorod

Steven H. Aden

Americans United for Life

John M. Baker

Greene Espel PLLP


audio

#346687

Brian Cardile

Rulings Editor, Podcast Host, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reporter
brian_cardile@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com