Institute For Justice's Free Speech Win For Caveman Blogger
From IJ's site:
Arlington, Va.--This morning, in a big win for free speech, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that diabetic blogger Steve Cooksey's First Amendment lawsuit against the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition may go forward.Cooksey ran a Dear Abby-style advice column on his blog in which he gave one-on-one advice about how to follow the low carbohydrate "paleo" diet. The Board deemed Cooksey's advice the unlicensed practice of nutritional counseling, sent him a 19-page print-up of his website indicating in red pen what he was and was not allowed to say, and threatened him with legal action if he did not comply.
The decision reverses a previous ruling by a federal district judge that had dismissed Cooksey's case, reasoning that advice is not protected speech and hence Cooksey had suffered no injury to his First Amendment rights.
"This decision will help ensure that the courthouse doors remain open to speakers whose rights are threatened by overreaching government" said Institute for Justice Senior Attorney Jeff Rowes. "In America, citizens don't have to wait until they are fined or thrown in jail before they are allowed to challenge government action that chills their speech."
From prior to the decision:
Steve Cooksey said, "I give people simple advice on what food to buy at the grocery store. I have believed all along that my advice is protected by the First Amendment, and I am looking forward to proving that the censorship of my speech is unconstitutional."IJ Attorney Paul Sherman said, "Steve's case raises one of the most important unanswered questions in First Amendment law: Can occupational-licensing laws trump free speech? Today's ruling means that we are finally going to get an answer to that question."
The video:
And frankly, as somebody pointed out on YouTube, there are a number of private citizens who give far better, far more science-based advice than people with medical degrees.
Humbly...me, for example.
Essentially this is saying that an opinion of the layman can be spoken. Even if it is gossip.
A good ruling.
Jim P. at June 28, 2013 12:08 AM
I dont know, I was kinda hoping it would stand. I wanted to see if some enterprising person would start suing state representitives for speaking about and passing laws on subjects they have no knowledge of.
After all if some guy posting non medical advice can be told by the government to shut up as he has had no training surly they same could be done to politicians seeking to pass laws regulating businesses as they dont have business degrees
lujlp at June 28, 2013 12:48 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2013/06/28/institute_for_j.html#comment-3773601">comment from lujlpluj, just about every person who voted for the healthcare law would be in doodoo.
Amy Alkon at June 28, 2013 5:36 AM
To me it is begging a different gotcha title.
" So obvious even a Caveman can see it's stupid"
" a law so stupid even a Caveman can see it's unconstitutional"
If applied to congress and the press, pretty much only Dr Ron Paul should have been allowed to voice an opinion on Obamacare. Maybe it should only apply to gov't workers.
Joe j at June 28, 2013 9:50 AM
Leave a comment