Here is the link to the Order issued yesterday in my case against the Board of Medicine members

The below language is from GROK. The top link provides the 18 page order.

On August 20, 2026, Chief U.S. District Judge Lance E. Walker (D. Me.) issued an Order on Defendants’ Renewed Motion to Dismiss and Lifting Stay in Nass v. Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine, No. 1:23-cv-00321-LEW (Document 45).

The order is available on CourtListener (RECAP):
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.med.64309/gov.uscourts.med.64309.45.0.pdf
(or via the docket entry at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67704750/45/nass-v-maine-board-of-licensure-in-medicine/).

• The court lifted the prior stay (imposed under Younger abstention pending state Rule 80C proceedings).

• It granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ renewed motion to dismiss (ECF No. 38).

  • Granted (absolute quasi-judicial immunity): Defendants (Board members in their personal capacities) have absolute immunity from damages claims arising out of the Board’s hearing and its final determination/sanctions.

  • Denied: Claims related to the January 2022 Psychological Evaluation Order (ordering Nass to submit to a neuropsychological/psychological evaluation) may proceed. The court held this action lacked the hallmarks of quasi-judicial proceedings (no process, no evidence of mental unfitness, ex parte, etc.), so only qualified immunity (not absolute) applies. The Superior Court’s earlier vacatur of that Order as arbitrary and capricious, and the lack of a decision on retaliatory motive for it, do not compel qualified immunity or res judicata/issue preclusion barring the federal claims.

• Res judicata, Heck v. Humphrey-style arguments, and mootness claims were rejected as to the surviving claims (the evaluation order caused alleged reputational/speech-related harm supporting potential damages, even though Nass did not comply and the order was later vacated).

The case involves Nass’s personal-capacity First Amendment retaliation claims (and related Maine Civil Rights Act claims) against Board members over actions tied to her COVID-19-related speech and patient care. Official-capacity/Board claims had previously been dismissed. The order expressly leaves the precise remaining scope of claims for later proceedings (e.g., summary judgment) but confirms at minimum that the Psychological Evaluation Order portion survives.

This matches contemporaneous reporting (e.g., Eugene Volokh’s August 20, 2026, Volokh Conspiracy / Reason post quoting substantial portions of the order). The docket confirms the filing date as August 20, 2026.

I like to hope that now, before any Boards decide to ruin someone’s career and reputation, simply because the Board staff or Executive Director or Governor or other Board Members or whomever signals to them that the person beign evaluated deserves such treatment, they will take their responsibility more seriously.

The Board Members unanimously ordered me (without a shred of evidence according to two courts) to undergo a psychological evaluation and issued an immediate license suspension, calling me a danger to the public, simply because my educated, professional opinion differed from theirs.

I am very grateful that the courts recognized this as arbitrary and capricious, and that Judge Walker suggests they deserve no immunity because their conduct went far beyond whatis expected in their official capacity.

However, this order simply means that the Board is expected to appeal, and assuming the appeal fails, we will have discovery and then a trial, with yet another new judge. I will spend close to another year embroiled in legal proceedings. The financial costs will be considerable.

Yet we must move forward, because this case is critical to stopping such behavior in future. So I will put my head down and plow forward.

In case you were wondering, the Medical Board does not provide its members with liability insurance for acts outside their professional capacity. So they could be financially penalized individually for their [imho callous] approach to my case. They will be provided with counsel by the office of the Attorney General.