National Association For The Advancement Of Psychoanalysis v. California Board Of Psychology

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “[t]he communication that occurs during psychoanalysis is entitled to constitutional protection, but it is not immune from regulation”
• applying rational basis test after deciding that challenged mental health professional licensing scheme did not implicate a fundamental right
• “We conclude that, even if a speech interest is implicated, California’s licensing scheme passes First Amendment scrutiny.” (emphasis added)
• “Although some speech interest may be implicated, California’s content-neutral mental health licensing scheme is a valid exercise of its police power____” (emphasis added)
• “We conclude that, even if a speech interest is implicated, California’s licensing scheme passes First Amendment scrutiny.” (emphasis added)
• “Although some speech interest may be implicated, California’s content-neutral mental health licensing scheme is a valid exercise of its police power.... ” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).