Chiles v. Salazar · ¶65

Fortunately, that is not the world the First Amendment envisions for us. Licensed professionals “have a host of good-faith disagreements” about the “prudence” and “ethics” of various practices in their fields. NIFLA, 585 U. S., at 772. Medical consensus, too, is not static; it evolves and always has. A prevailing standard of care may refect what most practitioners believe today, but it cannot mark the outer boundary of what they may say tomorrow. Far from a test of professional consensus, the First Amendment rests instead on a simple truth: “[T]he people lose” whenever the government transforms prevailing opinion into enforced conformity. Ibid.

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