Physicians’ Right to Free Speech Upheld in AAPS v. ABIM
June 04 2024 - 10:15AM
A precedent-setting ruling in favor of the First Amendment was
issued today by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
This influential Court established the right to object in court to
censorship of physicians’ speech on topics ranging from government
Covid policies to abortion, stated AAPS General Counsel Andrew
Schlafly.
The Court held that there is a constitutional “right to hear”
that enables a sponsor of conferences, such as Plaintiff
Association of American Physicians & Surgeons Educational
Foundation (“AAPS”), to challenge censorship that chills
presentations at its events. “This landmark ruling will be cited
nationwide for decades to come,” Mr. Schlafly observed.
AAPS sued three medical specialty boards for their threatened
actions against the board certifications of physicians because of
speaking out on medical controversies. Physicians earned and need
these board certifications in order to practice medicine in most
hospitals and remain in most insurance networks, as Mr. Schlafly
pointed out.
Defendants are the American Board of Internal Medicine (“ABIM”),
the American Board of Family Medicine (“ABFM”), and the American
Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (“ABOG”). In addition,
Alejandro Mayorkas, Biden’s Homeland Security Secretary, is a
defendant due to alleged government interference with freedom of
speech.
The Fifth Circuit also invalidated Galveston Local Rule 6, by
which that federal district court has infringed on plaintiffs’
right to amend their lawsuits. The Fifth Circuit agreed with AAPS
that this district court rule is contrary to the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, and thus must be voided.
“AAPS can now pursue its claim against censorship by the Biden
Administration,” AAPS Executive Director Jane Orient, M.D.,
stated.
Fifth Circuit Judge James Ho agreed with the panel majority on
the key issues and wrote separately to decry attempts by some to
impose censorship on others. “In America, we don’t fear
disagreement—we embrace it. We persuade—we don’t punish. We engage
in conversation—not cancellation,” Judge Ho wrote.
“We know how to disagree with one another without destroying one
another. Or at least that’s how it’s supposed to work,” Judge Ho
added as he sided fully with this lawsuit against
censorship.
“With this landmark ruling in favor of the First Amendment, our
country can end improper censorship of viewpoints,” Andrew Schlafly
stated.
Contact: Jane Orient, M.D., AAPS Executive Director, (520)
323-3110, or Andrew Schlafly, AAPS General Counsel, (908)
719-8608