To address your edit about the state requiring 100 pages before an abortion. I don’t think it would be unconstitutional to do so unless there was some undue burden put on the provider such as the document having to be on paper with red ink instead of being able to be delivered electronically.
I believe that same scenario where if the state were to require 100 pages of documents before buying ammo, that the information would also be allowed to be delivered electronically as well. And if a customer were to refuse electronic delivery then they could probably expect to pay a fee for printing.
My point is that the printing can and is being used as an undue burdon. States don’t have to allow an electronic means of dissemination. If they can force you to print one page then forcing you to print 100 is within their authority.
I understand your point that it would be used to try to prevent access to abortion services in your hypothetical but I don’t believe the state has the power to force you to print information and if it were to go to court that the state would have to allow electronic delivery. Even in this case, it was the county department of health providing the documents to retailers to give to purchasers of guns and ammo to get around the issue.
I’m not so sure gun stores wouldn’t be required to print copies as the law is written.
The law is not clear on the requirement for sellers, they must distribute the literature, but there is no requirement that the literature must be furnished by the health department. As far as I can tell the health department is only required to furnish each store with one copy.
Further if the requirement is that the seller must use literature furnished by the health dept couldn’t the health dept stop all sales by not furnishing copies.
To address your edit about the state requiring 100 pages before an abortion. I don’t think it would be unconstitutional to do so unless there was some undue burden put on the provider such as the document having to be on paper with red ink instead of being able to be delivered electronically.
I believe that same scenario where if the state were to require 100 pages of documents before buying ammo, that the information would also be allowed to be delivered electronically as well. And if a customer were to refuse electronic delivery then they could probably expect to pay a fee for printing.
My point is that the printing can and is being used as an undue burdon. States don’t have to allow an electronic means of dissemination. If they can force you to print one page then forcing you to print 100 is within their authority.
I understand your point that it would be used to try to prevent access to abortion services in your hypothetical but I don’t believe the state has the power to force you to print information and if it were to go to court that the state would have to allow electronic delivery. Even in this case, it was the county department of health providing the documents to retailers to give to purchasers of guns and ammo to get around the issue.
I’m not so sure gun stores wouldn’t be required to print copies as the law is written.
The law is not clear on the requirement for sellers, they must distribute the literature, but there is no requirement that the literature must be furnished by the health department. As far as I can tell the health department is only required to furnish each store with one copy.
Further if the requirement is that the seller must use literature furnished by the health dept couldn’t the health dept stop all sales by not furnishing copies.