Docs v. Glocks on en banc review at the Eleventh Circuit
Yesterday, Florida’s Treasure Coast Newspapers published my opinion column on the heavily debated “Docs vs. Glocks” case. Pacific Legal Foundation‘s Caleb Trotter and Deborah J. La Fetra recently filed an amicus brief in support of physicians’ First Amendment right to free speech in Wollschlaeger v. Governor of Florida, a/k/a “Docs vs. Glocks,” where the United States Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld, three times in a row, the Florida law which restricts doctors’ ability to question their patients about gun ownership.
In my op-ed, I explain why supporting doctors’ free speech rights here amounts to support of free speech for all professionals:
This case might focus on doctors, but it affects all Americans. If the state can violate the freedom of speech of doctors for spurious reasons, then the state can violate your freedom of speech, too.
As a future member of the Florida Bar (fingers-crossed), I am particularly interested in the case’s outcome. At a minimum, all professionals — lawyers, teachers, journalists and others — should take notice when the state says it can ban the topics about which a fellow professional can speak.
Bottom line: physicians, lawyers, veterinarians, advertisers and other licensed professionals beware.
The Eleventh Circuit will hear oral argument on en banc review in Wollschlaeger tomorrow, June 21, and for the sake of all professionals, I hope it makes the right decision.
What to read next
In February, eight Black and Hispanic families filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Connecticut State Department of Education’s race-based enrollment quotas for Hartford’s magnet schools. This policy mandates that 25% of a … ›
Don’t know how to identify every one of the 1,500 endangered species? This group wants to throw you in prison.
Ok, that’s a slight overstatement. But not as much of one as you would think. Activist group WildEarth Guardians apparently dreams of a world in which people can be thrown … ›