A recent court decision once again highlights the ability for legal rulings to impact telehealth policy, consistent with the focus of CCHP’s recent Telehealth and Court Cases webinar series, and raises interesting policy questions that have potentially far-reaching implications. Last month in Hines v. Pardue, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit found in favor of Ronald Hines, a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, after an over-a-decade-long court battle. At issue was whether Dr. Hines was violating Texas law requiring an in-person visit prior to providing medical advice over the internet, or whether his communications were protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The court, which decided in favor of Dr. Hines, stated in its September decision that the State of Texas was directly regulating Dr. Hines’ speech and that the in-person exam requirement failed to survive even intermediate scrutiny.