Chiles v. Salazar · ¶169

On the majority's view, these kinds of regulations become unenforceable if the healthcare provider risks harming patients with their speech rather than an operation. Providers who offer “cruel” speech-only therapies or who use speech to (intentionally or incompetently) harm the welfare of patients, for example, can now assert a First Amendment right to carry on, regardless of these standards.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.