SF CITY ATTORNEY APPOINTS HIMSELF “SPEECH POLICE:” SUE HIM GOOD AND HARD. An old reporter friend tipped me off to an important (but so far) not reported lawsuit in the Federal District Court covering San Francisco.
Everybody is familiar with U.S. News & World Report, which for decades has been the publisher of “rankings” for everything from grad schools to mortgage lenders. Whether you agree with the various rankings is of no moment. They disclose their methodology, are not “bought off” by advertisers and most importantly, ratings and reviews are generally protected by First Amendment law anyway.
OK, that’s the set up. Here’s what’s going on: San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu — out of the clear blue sky — sends a subpoena to U.S. News complaining and demanding information about their recent review of “Best Hospitals.”
Here’s a link below to a copy of his subpoena. What shocks the conscience is his statement that “As the City Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco, I have a duty to ensure San Franciscans and Californians have access to accurate information as they make critical healthcare decisions.”
Click to open: SF Subpoena
Really? I’ve looked at the portfolio his office has been given, and don’t see “misinformation police” listed as one of his “duties.” Something smells here. His subpoena is based on investigation of “Substantiation of Advertising (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17508)“.
This is not the first time a party has tried to shut down a publisher under “False Advertising” laws, and with rare exception, they inevitably fail. USN&WR, to their credit has filed a responsive lawsuit, which can be read here.
The papers filed (IMHO) could have been more tightly written, and like most BigLaw firms, they use 20 words when five would do, and I suspect there are other bases of complaint they could have asserted. But that’s just Monday morning quarterbacking on my part.
The $64 questions are: 1) How does a city attorney appoint himself the guardian of “misinformation” over speech that a first-year law student could show is constitutionally protected; and 2) given that the City Attorney is by its own admission tasked with providing “the highest quality legal services to the Mayor, Board of Supervisors, and other elected officials,” the reasonable reader — and perhaps an inquisitive reporter — should ask “Who prompted Chiu to issue this subpoena?”
This is just the beginning.