Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1140_5368.pdf
Page Number: 13.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

P. A.  v.  United  States,  559  U. S.  229,  250  (2010);  Ohralik 
v.  Ohio  State  Bar  Assn.,  436  U. S.  447,  455–456  (1978). 
Second, under our precedents, States may regulate profes-
sional  conduct,  even  though  that  conduct  incidentally 
involves speech.  See, e.g., id., at 456; Planned Parenthood 
of  Southeastern  Pa.  v.  Casey,  505  U. S.  833,  884  (1992) 
(opinion  of  O’Connor,  KENNEDY,  and  Souter,  JJ.).  But 
neither line of precedents is implicated here. 

1 
This  Court’s  precedents  have  applied  a  lower  level  of 
scrutiny  to  laws  that  compel  disclosures  in  certain  con-
texts.  In Zauderer, for example, this Court upheld a rule
requiring  lawyers  who  advertised  their  services  on  a
contingency-fee  basis  to  disclose  that  clients  might  be  re- 
quired to pay some fees and costs.  471 U. S., at 650–653. 
Noting  that  the  disclosure  requirement  governed  only 
“commercial  advertising”  and  required  the  disclosure  of 
“purely factual and uncontroversial information about the
terms  under  which  . . .  services  will  be  available,”  the 
Court explained that such requirements should be upheld 
unless  they  are  “unjustified  or  unduly  burdensome.”    Id., 
at 651. 

The Zauderer standard does not apply here.  Most obvi-
ously,  the  licensed  notice  is  not  limited  to  “purely  factual
and  uncontroversial  information  about  the  terms  under 
which . . . services will be available.”  471 U. S., at 651; see 
also  Hurley  v.  Irish-American  Gay,  Lesbian  and  Bisexual 
Group  of  Boston,  Inc.,  515  U. S.  557,  573  (1995)  (explain-
ing that Zauderer does not apply outside of these circum-
stances).  The notice in no way relates to the services that
licensed  clinics  provide.    Instead,  it  requires  these  clinics 
to  disclose  information  about  state-sponsored  services—
including  abortion,  anything  but  an  “uncontroversial” 
topic.  Accordingly, Zauderer has no application here.