The Liberty Justice Center is filing a lawsuit against the California Medical Board and the California Attorney General on behalf of two practicing doctors, alleging that the state’s Covid-19 Misinformation Bill violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment.

The bill, AB 2098, passed the State Assembly in May and the State Senate on August 29. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed the legislation into law on Sept. 30.

AB 2098 grants the Medical Board of California the ability to revoke the license of any practicing physician within the state who is determined to be spreading “misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus.”

As the bill states, “Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California.” Current California law “requires the applicable board to take action against any licensed physician and surgeon who is charged with unprofessional conduct, as provided.”

On Oct. 3, the Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit, McDonald v. Lawson, in the U.S. Court for the Central District of California on behalf of two doctors. Mark McDonald is one of the doctors suing and Kristina Lawson is the president of the California Medical Board.

The Liberty Justice Center describes itself as “a nonprofit, public-interest litigation center that fights to protect Americans’ fundamental constitutional rights.”

The other plaintiff in the case is Dr. Jeff Barke, a primary care physician.

As the lawsuit makes clear, neither McDonald nor Barke has been “disciplined by any medical regulatory authority, had his medical license suspended, or had a complaint against him sustained for unprofessional conduct….”

On Oct. 7, CNS News spoke by telephone with LJC Managing Attorney Daniel Suhr….

“This case is important for doctors because it’s going to limit their speech rights, but really I think the important change on the ground is for patients,” said Suhr.

As he explained, AB 2098 “prevents doctors from giving their best medical advice […] and from pursuing the best science,” adding that the bill “shuts down the scientific and medical inquiry that is so essential to developing the best science and the best policy.”

CNS asked Suhr if there would ever be a case where he feels that a central arbiter of truth would be necessary.

“There’s a legitimate and important role that government plays in keeping us safe,” Suhr explained. “What makes this law so problematic, is it doesn’t go after particular treatments or particular pharmaceutical products or medical devices, it goes after speech.”

The above comes from an Oct. 10 posting on CNS News.