National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
United States Supreme Court
138 S. Ct. 2361 (2018)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act (1) required each licensed clinic to disclose to its pregnant patients that the state provided free or subsidized abortions and (2) required each unlicensed clinic to disclose in any advertising that the clinic was not licensed by the state. With respect to the unlicensed notice, the law required a prewritten, 29-word statement on all advertisements. The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (plaintiff) sued the State of California (defendant), arguing that the law violated clinics’ First Amendment rights to free speech. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit applied intermediate scrutiny to the notice requirements, finding that the law regulated professional speech, which the court held to be a separate category of content-based speech not subject to strict scrutiny. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)
Concurrence (Kennedy, J.)
Dissent (Breyer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.