Opinion: California telehealth laws restict free speech
This opinion article argues that California’s medical licensing laws, particularly as applied to telehealth, unconstitutionally restrict free speech by prohibiting out-of-state doctors from consulting with California patients without a state license. The author highlights a legal challenge brought by Dr. Sean McBride, a New York oncologist, and Shellye Horowitz, a California patient, who contend the rules criminalize basic patient-doctor conversations across state lines. The piece compares the case to past rulings in which courts rejected efforts to classify speech as professional “conduct,” including NAACP v. Button, a Texas veterinary telehealth case, and NIFLA v. Becerra. It warns that vague regulations risk chilling protected speech and suggests lawmakers should clearly distinguish between regulating medical actions, such as prescribing or performing procedures, and regulating speech-based consultations.