I have written quite a few posts about Assembly Bill 2098, which was created to scare physicians from criticizing the conventional view about Covid 19 (i.e., the vaccines are completely safe and effective with virtually no risk of serious harm, off-label drugs for Covid like Ivermectin and HCQ are unproven and dangerous, and masks and lockdowns work). https://wp.me/p7pwQD-1it.

The original bill would have made speaking challenging the conventional narrative a board-disciplinable offense. However, the original bill was modified and now is limited communications between a physician and her patients. I have argued that this amended bill is still unconstitutional because it sanctions physicians for communicating such information to patients via newsletters or social media.

But it’s not like the Board is sitting on its thumbs waiting for the bill to pass before it takes action against Cali. Physicians.

I am aware that the Board is already conducting investigations of at least physicians for speaking out in public about Covid and even for attending a rally (as hard as that is to believe). These investigations are in their early stages.

In my opinion and in the opinion of many other knowledgable attorneys, this kind of action by the Board is a violation of the physicians’ First Amendment rights. I think it also illegally interferes with the patients’ rights as well. I have heard that the so-called legal justification is the Board’s obligation to prosecute physician dishonesty. I am very skeptical of that argument.

My view is that it is time to take on the Board on this issue, now, meaning before any of these investigations go any further, and before AB 2098 is passed and signed into law.

I read recently that only 49.5 percent of the (eligible?) US population is fully vaccinated and boosted. To me, that means that a very big percentage of the US population is not fully sold on the basic narrative of the Covid vaccine.

I expect that as the pandemic waxes and wanes and we see new variants, the number of people not being fully vaccinated and boosted will increase. I will also guess that as time progresses, the scientific justification for continued boostering will get weaker and weaker. But I also suspect that the CDC and the infectious disease mafia will be reluctant to acknowledge (what I think will be) the growing future scientific evidence against repeated boostering.

Because of this, I think more physicians will speak out against this without end-in-sight vaccination programs, which will give the Board more targets.

The point is I can see how the Board’s targeting physicians who speak out against the CDC’s narrative to be a new cottage industry for the Board, similar to the way the Board went after all the medical exemption writing docs.

For tactical, strategic, and substantive reasons, this is a situation where it is better to take on the Board, chips fall where they may, prior to the Board filing an accusation (i.e., board charging a doc) against the first doc. I suspect there will be more than one lawsuit filed and that different attorneys will be involved in these battles. I am going to be one of them. These cases should involve more than the docs, but they and the physicians are the critical part of it.

So, if you have been contacted by the Board for “spreading co-misformation, or are a doc who feels chilled or intimidated from telling the public or your patients on social media what you think about the conventional narrative. AND you have to gumption to challenge what the Board is doing, shoot me an email.
The only thing I can promise is that it will be an interesting and wild ride. And also, there is every reason to believe based on First Amendment jurisprudence, that the Supreme Court is on your side on this one. And it’s about time!

Rick Jaffe, Esq.
rickjaffeesquire@gmail.com