We recently wrote to you about Dr. Gold testifying at a pivotal hearing involving the California Medical Board (CMB) threatening her California physician license. Before we delve into her testimony, it's crucial to provide the backstory that led to this political hit. In 2020, Dr. Gold became a whistleblower and accused the government of massive corruption.
Dr. Gold had proof that the government, the media, even your own doctor, was lying to you. This prompted her to provide life-saving facts directly to the people via speeches, interviews, the AFLDS.org website, emails, and social media. The California legislature especially was angry because Dr. Gold exposed many of their specific lies.
Out of frustration that they could not simply revoke her unblemished 20-year physician license, California then sought to systematically silence all licensed physicians who opposed the government narrative! Assembly Bill 2098, the "No Second Opinion" Law prohibits licensed CA doctors from providing information to their patients that contradicts the government narrative. That was the sole purpose of the law – and in Committee hearings (April, August 2022) the politicians acknowledged this law was to silence Dr. Gold.
“Despite what would appear to be repeated conduct perpetrated by Dr. Gold involving the dissemination of false information regarding COVID-19, Dr. Gold's license remains active with the MBC and there appears to be no record of any disciplinary action taken against her. Given the air of legitimacy she sustains from her status as a licensed physician, Dr. Gold likely serves as an illustrative example of the type of behavior that the author of this bill seeks to unequivocally establish as constituting unprofessional conduct for physicians in California. Regardless of whether similar authority is already available to the MBC through other enforceable provisions in the Medical Practice Act, it is understandable that the author desires to make this authority explicit and confirm that doctors licensed in California who disseminate misinformation or disinformation should be held fully accountable.”
Tellingly, the CMB did not once argue that Dr. Gold ever spoke inaccurately. One would think that if the government was attempting to strip a physician of her license by accusing her of “spreading misinformation”, the government would have to at least argue that the physician spoke inaccurately. It is a credit to Dr. Gold’s intellect and restraint that the government had no evidence of inaccurate speech despite thousands of hours of public speaking over 3.5 years. They offered no testimony whatsoever that Dr. Gold ever spoke incorrectly.
As the case proceeded, the CMB's pretext of misinformation became ever flimsier, so the CMB attempted to conflate it with a “misdemeanor trespass” conviction. But the CMB has no regulatory authority over misdemeanors unrelated to the practice of medicine. Period.
The law as written is unequivocal: the CMB only has regulatory authority over issues relating to the public health and medical licenses. It has no authority over any other area. If we permit low-level bureaucrats from any random state agency to revoke business licenses over issues unrelated to that area, no business owner is safe: there will be no free speech for owners of restaurants, bars, gyms, hair salons, childcare and others.
The potential ramifications of this case extend far beyond Dr. Gold, impacting free speech for any business license holder.
Recognizing the need for a strong voice, knowing this is a fight we cannot lose and remain free, Dr. Gold stepped up to the challenge. While other physicians have been attacked in this fight, the testimony physician-attorney-warrior Dr. Gold provided was unimpeachable. With unwavering composure and a depth of knowledge, she left no room for doubt or contradiction.
This landmark First Amendment case can be summed up as follows: “Can a person who has a