National Ass'n for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis v. California Board of Psychology

Good Law
228 F.3d 1043
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 29, 2000No. 99-15243California6,119 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Tashima, J.

Plaintiff psychoanalysts Lionel Corbett, Cedrus Monte, and Allan Sowers, and the National Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis (“NAAP”) (collectively “plaintiffs”) sued defendants, members of the California Board of Psychology (“Board”), and the Attorney General of California, for declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Plaintiffs allege that California’s mental health licensing laws, which regulate the practice of psychology and other professions, restrict their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Specifically, they assert that the licensing scheme prohibits them from practicing psychoanalysis in California. The district court held that plaintiffs failed to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and dismissed their complaint and the action. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Psychoanalysis and Psycholoyy

“Psychoanalysis” is defined in Stedman’s Medical Dictionary (25th ed.1990) as:

Id. at 1284 ; see also American Medical Association Encyclopedia of Medicine 831 (1989) (“The psychoanalyst is usually a doctor of medicine.”).

“Psychology” has been defined as:

Id. at 832 (emphasis omitted). Psychology…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.