A federal judge has barred California medical regulators from investigating or disciplining three physicians based on the viewpoints they share with their patients about COVID-19.
In an order signed Wednesday, Senior U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb granted a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction in favor of Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Le Trinh Hoang and Dr. Brian Tyson.
The injunction applies only to those three doctors. It remains in effect pending the outcome of a lawsuit the doctors filed in January 2024 against California’s attorney general and two state medical boards. Children’s Health Defense (CHD) is funding the lawsuit.
“While the order technically only applies to our three doctor plaintiffs, it puts the boards on notice that a federal judge has found their Covid misinformation policy unconstitutional under the First Amendment,” wrote attorney Rick Jaffe, who represents the doctors in the case. “Every investigator and every board member now knows how this judge sees it.”
CHD CEO Mary Holland called the preliminary injunction a victory for the physicians.
“Fantastic news that doctors can still be doctors and not just mouthpieces for the state,” she said. “It verges on the absurd that Dr. Kory had to go to the U.S. Supreme Court and back to the California district court to establish that he — not the state — can be a doctor to his patients. But there it is.”
Writing today on Substack, Kory said, “Free speech prevailed. We do not have to parrot pharma-government nonsense to keep our licenses. That principle was worth every day of this fight.”
Ruling doesn’t resolve underlying lawsuit
Under the order, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Medical Board of California Executive Director Reji Varghese, Osteopathic Medical Board of California Executive Director Erika Calderon and others acting on their behalf are prohibited from investigating, prosecuting, accusing or sanctioning the three physicians based on “the viewpoint of the information, recommendations, or advice they give a patient about COVID-19,” even if that information contradicts the positions of public health authorities.
The judge said regulators may not characterize a physician’s refusal to communicate the government’s position on disputed COVID-19 issues as either an informed consent violation or a departure from the applicable standard of care.
However, Shubb’s order makes clear that the injunction does not prevent state medical boards from pursuing other disciplinary action against the physicians. This includes failures to obtain informed consent regarding material risks or reasonable treatment alternatives, or other conduct that can be regulated independently of their views on COVID-19.
The ruling does not resolve the underlying lawsuit, which will continue as the court considers the merits of the physicians’ claims.
Aaron Bone, chief of Legislative and Public Affairs at the Medical Board of California, told The Defender that the board “has no comment on this matter.”
Requests for comment sent to the offices of Bonta and Calderon by The Defender went unanswered.
Hellbound and Down 