"Can Speech Policy Protect Public Health?" in Print in Utah Law Review

The article frames a technical legal and constitutional question about health speech policy through an academic institutional lens (Utah Law Review), centering legal expertise and public choice theory rather than advocacy. Language is measured and analytical rather than charged. The framing presents constitutional protections and public health as potentially competing interests, a mainstream libertarian-leaning but structurally balanced approach typical of legal scholarship venues republished in Reason.

Primary voices: academic or expert

• This article does not address the empirical effects of health misinformation on actual public health outcomes
• This article does not center voices of affected communities (patients, public health practitioners, marginalized populations vulnerable to health disinformation)