In 2014, in Wollschlaeger v. Governor of Florida, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a Florida ban on physician speech about firearm ownership was a valid regulation of professional conduct. The court reasoned that because the speech took place within the physician-patient relationship it should be treated as professional conduct that may be regulated by the state and not subject to First Amendment scrutiny. This Comment argues that the Eleventh Circuit mischaracterized the speech as conduct and that an en banc hearing should be granted to reverse this decision to avoid a negative impact on physicians’ First Amendment rights
Florida media lawyers and journalists are raising First Amendment alarms about what they see as a so...
A militia right or an individual right? In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the ...
The two landmark gun rights cases, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, c...
In 2014, in Wollschlaeger v. Governor of Florida, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit...
The physician–patient relationship rests on a bedrock of trust. Without trust, patients—and for that...
Americans discuss some of the most intimate details of their lives within the small confines of thei...
The article examines the U.S. states\u27 obligations to protect patients\u27 best interests and eval...
The United States Supreme Court held that Florida Bar rules prohibiting attorneys from using direct ...
In the past several years, a number of states have enacted laws restricting physicians’ rights to sp...
Some regulations of professional-client communications raise important, but sofar largely overlooked...
This Note addresses the impact of Florida’s Patients’ Right to Know About Adverse Medical Incidents ...
The circuits are split as to what level of scrutiny should be applied to challenged regulations of p...
Tobacco litigation was unquestionably successful, but it is dangerous to expect that it can be easil...
The first Section of Part I reviews two U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Rust v. Sullivan and Planned P...
In D.C. v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an...
Florida media lawyers and journalists are raising First Amendment alarms about what they see as a so...
A militia right or an individual right? In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the ...
The two landmark gun rights cases, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, c...
In 2014, in Wollschlaeger v. Governor of Florida, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit...
The physician–patient relationship rests on a bedrock of trust. Without trust, patients—and for that...
Americans discuss some of the most intimate details of their lives within the small confines of thei...
The article examines the U.S. states\u27 obligations to protect patients\u27 best interests and eval...
The United States Supreme Court held that Florida Bar rules prohibiting attorneys from using direct ...
In the past several years, a number of states have enacted laws restricting physicians’ rights to sp...
Some regulations of professional-client communications raise important, but sofar largely overlooked...
This Note addresses the impact of Florida’s Patients’ Right to Know About Adverse Medical Incidents ...
The circuits are split as to what level of scrutiny should be applied to challenged regulations of p...
Tobacco litigation was unquestionably successful, but it is dangerous to expect that it can be easil...
The first Section of Part I reviews two U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Rust v. Sullivan and Planned P...
In D.C. v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an...
Florida media lawyers and journalists are raising First Amendment alarms about what they see as a so...
A militia right or an individual right? In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court of the ...
The two landmark gun rights cases, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, c...