Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1140_5368.pdf
Page Number: 18

14 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FAMILY AND 
LIFE ADVOCATES v. BECERRA
 
Opinion of the Court 

U. S.,  at  791.    As  defined  by  the  courts  of  appeals,  the
professional-speech  doctrine  would  cover  a  wide  array  of 
individuals—doctors, lawyers, nurses, physical therapists,
truck drivers, bartenders, barbers, and many others.  See 
Smolla,  Professional  Speech  and  the  First  Amendment, 
119 W. Va. L. Rev. 67, 68 (2016).  One court of appeals has
even  applied  it  to  fortune  tellers.   See  Moore-King,  708 
F. 3d,  at  569.  All  that  is  required  to  make  something  a
“profession,”  according  to  these  courts,  is  that  it  involves
personalized  services  and  requires  a  professional  license
from the State.  But that gives the States unfettered power
to  reduce  a  group’s  First  Amendment  rights  by  simply
imposing  a  licensing  requirement.    States  cannot  choose 
the  protection  that  speech  receives  under  the  First 
Amendment,  as  that  would  give  them  a  powerful  tool  to
impose  “invidious  discrimination  of  disfavored  subjects.” 
Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc., 507 U. S. 410, 423– 
424, n. 19 (1993); see also Riley, 487 U. S., at 796 (“[S]tate 
labels  cannot  be  dispositive  of  [the]  degree  of  First 
Amendment  protection”  (citing  Bigelow  v.  Virginia,  421 
U. S. 809, 826 (1975)). 

C 
In  sum,  neither  California  nor  the  Ninth  Circuit  has 
identified  a  persuasive  reason  for  treating  professional 
speech as a unique category that is exempt from ordinary 
First  Amendment  principles.  We  do  not  foreclose  the 
possibility  that  some  such  reason exists.    We need  not  do 
so  because  the  licensed  notice  cannot  survive  even  inter-
mediate  scrutiny.  California  asserts  a  single  interest  to
justify  the  licensed  notice:  providing  low-income  women 
with  information  about  state-sponsored  services.    Assum-
ing  that  this  is  a  substantial  state  interest,  the  licensed 
notice is not sufficiently drawn to achieve it. 

If  California’s  goal  is  to  educate  low-income  women
about  the  services  it  provides,  then  the  licensed  notice  is