Berkeley Says Supreme Court Strengthened Defense for RF Disclosure Law

The Supreme Court exempted policies like the RF disclosure law in Berkeley when it rejected a California disclosure law in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, the city argued Thursday in a brief (in Pacer) at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. CTIA, which sued the city and claims the NIFLA decision affirmed its view the First Amendment doesn’t allow government to compel businesses to speak (see 1807260051), asked (in Pacer) the court Friday if it may file a "succinct reply" of 10 pages to the city's arguments by Sept. 6. Berkeley said the Supreme Court ruling didn’t conflict with the 9th Circuit upholding the city’s law, but rather “strengthens” the appeals court’s decision: "While deciding to apply a heightened level of scrutiny to disclosures in the uniquely contested context of abortion counseling, the Court distinguished that case from cases involving either 'health and safety warnings' or 'purely factual and uncontroversial disclosures about commercial products.'" The Berkeley law meets both standards, the city said.