Raffensperger v. Jackson (and Vice Versa)

Summary

The court held that the Georgia Lactation Consultant Practice Act violates the Georgia Constitution’s due process protection for pursuing a lawful occupation because it substantially restricts non-IBCLC providers from providing lactation care for compensation without a sufficient health, safety, or public-morals justification. The court adopted a three-step framework requiring proof that the occupation is lawful, that the regulation unreasonably burdens its practice, and that the government has a sufficient and reasonably necessary justification. The court reversed the due process ruling, vacated the separate equal-protection ruling as unnecessary to reach, and noted that all justices concurred except one disqualified justice.