States frequently compel health professionals and commercial entities to disclose information relevant to patient or consumer decision making. For many years, such laws were presumed to be constitutional, despite the First Amendment’s protection of free speech. But after the Supreme Court’s decision in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra (NIFLA) in late June 2018,¹ the status of such laws is an open question.

中文翻译：

---

最高法院的危机怀孕中心案—对健康法的影响

州经常强迫卫生专业人员和商业实体披露与患者或消费者决策有关的信息。多年来，尽管第一修正案保护言论自由，但这些法律仍被认为是宪法。但是，在最高法院于2018年6月下旬在美国家庭与生活倡导者协会诉Becerra案（NIFLA）中作出判决之后，¹这些法律的地位是一个悬而未决的问题。