Blog

Paperwork All Filed in our Challenge to AB 2098; Next Up, the Preliminary Injunction Hearing on January 23rd

Paperwork All Filed in our Challenge to AB 2098; Next Up, the Preliminary Injunction Hearing on January 23rd

Comments 0 Comment

I just filed our reply on our preliminary injunction motion. Here it is: Hoang Final Repyfilingcopy I think you will like it. Here are the Attorney General’s response papers to our motion for a preliminary injunction. Our reply responds to these papers. response calderondeclaration limdeclaration requestjudicialnotice Since the elephant that will be in the courtroom on the 23rd will be Judge Slaughter’s decision in the McDonald case denying a preliminary injunction enjoining AB 2098 (now Section 2270 of the Business…

Read More Read More

Must See CHD TV on AB 2098

Must See CHD TV on AB 2098

Comments 1 comment

Here is the link to the legal update on CHD’s and PIC’s lawsuit against AB 2098. https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/chd-federal-lawsuit-over-ca-covid-misinformation-bill/ There is an excellent discussion by Dr. Sanjay Verma explaining how often the public health authorities got it wrong during Covid and the lack of science behind the public health decisions we all have been living with for the past three years. And I always have a good time when FG&J get together (Ray Flores, Greg Glaser, and yours truly). (Hopefully, they edited…

Read More Read More

Hot off the Press on Cali. AB 2098: Federal Judge Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction in the First Court Challenge; We’re up next in a few weeks

Hot off the Press on Cali. AB 2098: Federal Judge Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction in the First Court Challenge; We’re up next in a few weeks

Comments 1 comment

Judge Slaughter of the Central District of California has just released his 30-page decision denying the Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in McDonald v. Lawson. Here is the opinion: McDonald PI Motion Denied That means AB 2098 will become effective January 1, 2023, as Bus. & Prof. Code Section 2270 next week. It is not clear what effect the law will have on actions or investigations by the medical and osteopathic boards because they take the position that they…

Read More Read More

Here is the Defender’s Article about Hoang v. Bonta

Here is the Defender’s Article about Hoang v. Bonta

Comments 1 comment

couldn’t have said it better! https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ray-l-flores-ii-8b302b15_chd-files-motion-to-prevent-california-from-activity-7006860507873755136-ZepV?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop Rick Jaffe, Esq.

Save the Date for the Mother of all AB 2098 First Amendment Hearings

Save the Date for the Mother of all AB 2098 First Amendment Hearings

Comments 0 Comment

So, here is the latest news. The hearing in our AB 2098 challenge Hoang v. Bonta, AND the hearing on the prior-filed case, Hoeg v. Lawson have both been set for January 23rd at 1:30 PM before Judge William B. Shubb. So far, the judge is holding live hearings, with online zoom viewing for the public, but the live part could change depending on what happens with the trifecta of viruses and hospitalizations. The judge may issue an order from…

Read More Read More

Preliminary Injunction Motion filed in our AB 2098 Challenge

Preliminary Injunction Motion filed in our AB 2098 Challenge

Comments 0 Comment

Yesterday afternoon, we filed the initial papers for a preliminary injunction in our lawsuit challenging Cali. AB 2098, the misinformed Covid misinformation bill which is set to take effect on January 1st. The hearing is set for January 17th before District Judge Dale A. Drozd, who currently doing law and motion hearings (like out motion) by Zoom. But the date and judge are a bit up in the air because our case is “related” to the Hoeg v. Newsom case…

Read More Read More

I’ve been pretty quiet for some time. Here is why: Hoang v. Bonta, challenging AB 2098

I’ve been pretty quiet for some time. Here is why: Hoang v. Bonta, challenging AB 2098

Comments 6 comments

Thursday afternoon, December 1st, we filed a lawsuit challenging California AB 2098 on behalf of a California osteopathic physician, LeTrinh Hoang, Physicians for Informed Consent, and Children’s Health Defense (California chapter). Here is the complaint: complaint Bobby K. and Mary Holland are working on the case with me (and my usual compatriots). Mary is working on the preliminary injunction motion as I write this. We expect to be before a federal judge in mid-January. Our case is somewhat different from…

Read More Read More

As expected,

As expected,

Comments 2 comments

Federal District Judge Slaughter denied the Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction stopping AB 2098 from going into effect and dismissed the complaint on standing grounds. However, he did give the Plaintiffs leave to refile to correct the standing defect. Here is the decision. Slaughter’d This was not a close case, and it’s not about the system being against people with a particular belief. The Plaintiffs did not adequately plead that they had the right to challenge the law. I…

Read More Read More

No Decision yet on the McDonald AB 2098 case, but methinks the writing is on the wall

No Decision yet on the McDonald AB 2098 case, but methinks the writing is on the wall

Comments 2 comments

Yesterday was the hearing/oral argument in the first challenge to Cali AB2098, the Covid misinformation bill. The case is McDonald v Lawson which is in Federal Court in the Central Disrict of California (Los Angeles). For such a big case, I thought the hearing was not very long and more tellingly, it focused on one issue only, standing, which is the suitability of the plaintiffs to bring the lawsuit. And frankly, I think that says it all. If the judge…

Read More Read More

The Cali AB 2098 Lawsuits So Far

The Cali AB 2098 Lawsuits So Far

Comments 2 comments

As you all know, on September 30th, Governor Newsom signed AB 2098, which created a sort of “new” Covid misinformation/disinformation law. I put “new” in quotes because the Medical Board took the position during the legislative process as well as in response to the first lawsuit challenging the law, that it already had the power to sanction physicians for spreading Covid misinformation to patients under its general powers. I personally think that’s a dubious proposition, but I suppose it does…

Read More Read More