This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Constitutional Law,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

Feb. 1, 2019

The Nascent, Nebulous NIFLA Doctrine

In its first chance to construe new First Amendment commercial speech doctrine articulated last spring by SCOTUS in 'NIFLA v. Becerra,' an en banc 9th Circuit panel united to block San Francisco's soda advertisement health warning, but split four ways on why the compelled speech was impermissible. Competing amici Wen Fa (Pacific Legal Foundation) and Ted Mermin (Berkeley Law; Public Good Law Center) unpack the ruling and the emerging doctrine.

Mermin ted

Ted Mermin

Interim Executive Director, Berkeley Center for Consumer Law and Economic Justice; Executive Director, Public Good Law Center,

Email: tmermin@law.berkeley.edu

Missing

Wencong Fa


audio

#351098

Brian Cardile

Rulings Editor, Podcast Host, California Supreme Court reporter
brian_cardile@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com