Federal Appeals Court Revives Dr. Scott Jensen Licensing Lawsuit
A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed lower court rulings on Sept. 15, reinstating a lawsuit filed by Dr. Scott Jensen against the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice. The litigation challenges the authority of a state licensing board to investigate a physician for public statements made while campaigning for governor. Twice, a federal judge threw out the lawsuit before the appellate panel ruled that Jensen deserves his day in court.
Four Board Investigations During Gubernatorial Campaign
From the start of the pandemic to mid-2022, the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice received 18 complaints regarding Jensen, a Chaska family physician, former state senator, and the 2022 Republican nominee against Gov. Tim Walz. According to the court, the objections “was almost always the same”: he was “spreading misinformation.” Those filings triggered four separate board investigations. One inquiry accused him of having “politiciz[ed] public health” and lasted more than a year. The board waited until after the 2022 election to demand an in-person conference under the subject line “In the Matter of the Medical License of Scott M. Jensen, M.D.” After Jensen hired a lawyer and prepared for the hearing, the investigation ended.
Chilling Effect on Free Speech and Public Debate
Judge David Stras wrote for the Eighth Circuit that the years of board inquiries caused Jensen to speak less and spend more, altering his message to constituents and prompting him to decline speaking invitations. The court noted that anyone in Jensen’s position would be concerned by the potential loss of a medical license, making the threat of future enforcement credible. While disciplining doctors who harm patients falls within the board’s mandate, policing a candidate’s speech does not, according to the appellate panel. The court also observed that because anyone can file a complaint, Jensen remains an easy target for political opponents.
Contrasting Media Coverage Across Minnesota Outlets
The Eighth Circuit’s decision highlights a contrast in how regional news organizations covered the litigation’s trajectory. When a federal judge first dismissed the lawsuit in 2024, the Star Tribune, KSTP, and Minnesota Lawyer reported the outcome. When a second dismissal followed in 2025, CBS Minnesota, the Rochester Post Bulletin, and the Mankato Free Press covered the story. However, when the unanimous appeals court reversed those rulings, reporting of the appellate decision was covered by MPR News and Minnesota Lawyer.
Next Steps in Federal District Court
The Eighth Circuit ruled that Jensen has standing to sue, sending the case back to the district court to decide the merits. The litigation centers on whether state licensing authorities can penalize a physician for good-faith beliefs and public discourse expressed during a political campaign. Attorney Chris Madel, writing in commentary for Alpha News, noted that Jensen staked his license, livelihood, and reputation on the principle that the government should not use regulatory power to punish speech it dislikes.
Frequently Asked Questions
What specific legal issue did the Eighth Circuit decide?
The three-judge panel decided that Dr. Scott Jensen has standing to sue the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice, returning the case to the district court to decide the merits.
How many complaints did the medical board receive about Dr. Jensen?
The Minnesota Board of Medical Practice received 18 complaints regarding Jensen between the start of the pandemic and mid-2022, which resulted in four separate investigations.
Which court issued the unanimous reversal?
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued the unanimous ruling on Sept. 15, overturning previous dismissals by lower federal judges.
Related reading