Font Size: 
First Amendment Lawyer Says Drug Companies Also Have Speech Rights
Daily Business Review
August 27, 2009
Newspapers, flag burners, students, protesters, religious groups and publisher Larry Flynt.
Those are typical plaintiffs who might come to mind when pressing free speech issues in the U.S. Supreme Court -- not drug companies and lobbyists.
But businesses and professionals have free speech rights and are not shy about flexing their First Amendment muscle.
Miami attorney Tom Julin said more industries are finding it worthwhile to their bottom line to sue the government, claiming their right to free speech has been compromised.
"Everyone has a First Amendment right -- large corporate interests and the little guy," he said.
The First Amendment lawyer with Richmond, Va.-based Hunton & Williams is lead counsel in two cases with wildly different back stories. Both center on often-maligned industries looking to protect their First Amendment interests.
Julin represents three data brokers suing Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire, which ban the sale of pharmacy information listing doctors and the medicines they prescribe.
The trade group, Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufactures of America, or PhRMA for short, was a party in Vermont and an amicus in Maine and New Hampshire.
Julin also represents the Florida Association of Professional Lobbyists and others, arguing Florida’s 2005 disclosure requirement on "indirect lobbying" -- often referred to as grassroots lobbying -- is unconstitutional.
Whether a lobbyist or a pharmaceutical company, Fort Lauderdale appellate attorney Bruce Rogow said more businesses are pressing their constitutional claims than ever.
"There has been a recognition by companies that commercial speech is important speech, that some of their arguments can be tailored to the First Amendment," said Rogow, special counsel at Alters Boldt Brown Rash Culmo.
In the lobbying case, plaintiffs argue the Florida Legislature turned a blind eye to public advocacy groups such as pro-life, civil rights, right-to-work and religious organizations.
Lobbyist Ron Book, who represents through his Miami and Tallahassee offices numerous municipalities as well as big businesses like the Miami Dolphins, said the law could turn a paid grassroots organizer into a criminal.
"There is a fair chance the general public would not know what it can do and what it can’t do under the lobbying laws of Florida," he said.
Julin's petition to the U.S. Supreme Court asks whether Florida's law requiring the identities of those paying for grassroots lobbying violates the U.S. Constitution. It also seeks a ruling on whether a ban on gifts for the purpose of lobbying violates the First Amendment.
WORST CASE
Julin and Book argue the worst-case scenario would be the government targeting protest groups through lobbyist registrations.
"Last time I checked, the right to petition your government was one of the most treasured constitutional rights," Book said.
For professional lobbyists like Book, the law is considered one of the strictest in the country and no doubt cuts into their maneuvering room and maybe even their bottom line. The amendment was passed during a special session in the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandal in which the Greenberg Traurig lobbyist was prosecuted for bilking Indian tribes and others.
