Cuyahoga County recently became the first Ohio county to ban the practice, while State Sen. Nickie Antonio is seeking statewide prohibition.
LGBT supporters wave their flag in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019. On Tuesday, the court weighed the legality of a Colorado ban on conversion therapy for minors. WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a case challenging Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy for minors, a decision that could potentially invalidate conversion therapy bans enacted in Cuyahoga County and several Northeast Ohio communities.
The case centers on a Colorado law that prohibits licensed therapists from providing treatments aimed at changing a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Plaintiff Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor, argues the law violates her First Amendment rights by preventing her from providing talk therapy to minors who voluntarily seek help reducing same-sex attraction or resolving gender dysphoria. Conversion therapy aims to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity, often using psychological, spiritual, or even physical methods.by major medical, psychological, and psychiatric organizations worldwide because research shows it is ineffective and can cause serious harm, including increased rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicidal thoughts.to ban conversion therapy for minors and vulnerable adults, with County Council voting unanimously to prohibit the practice. Cleveland, Lakewood, Cleveland Heights, and other Northeast Ohio municipalities already have similar bans in place. State Sen. Nickie Antonio, a Democrat from Lakewood and the first openly gay person to serve in the Ohio General Assembly,. However, her bill faces long odds in Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature. “The Republicans stand in the way of taking this step,” Antonio said, though she emphasized the importance of continuing the conversation.During more than an hour of oral arguments, the justices wrestled with fundamental questions about free speech, medical regulation, and how to categorize talk therapy that uses only words, not physical treatments. Chiles’ attorney argued that Colorado’s law amounts to “viewpoint discrimination,” silencing counselors who want to help minors pursue goals that conflict with state-favored views on gender and sexuality. “This law prophylactically bans voluntary conversations, censoring widely held views on debated moral, religious and scientific questions,” said attorney James Campbell. Colorado’s lawyer pushed back hard, insisting the state is simply regulating medical treatment, not speech. “Colorado’s law prohibits licensed professionals from performing one specific treatment because that treatment does not work and carries great risk of harm,” said Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson.Several justices appeared troubled by Colorado’s argument that talk therapy should be treated differently than other forms of speech simply because it’s provided by a licensed professional. Justice Amy Coney Barrett highlighted what she called an “odd” distinction: if two therapists treat the same patient seeking to live consistently with their biological sex, but one uses medication and the other uses talk therapy, “under your theory, those two scenarios are sufficiently different from a constitutional perspective that one could be allowed and the other not.” Justice Samuel Alito raised troubling historical examples, asking whether medical consensus has sometimes “been politicized, has been taken over by ideology.” He pointed to past instances when medical professionals endorsed forced sterilization of people with low IQs or the immediate institutionalization of children with Down syndrome. Hashim M. Mooppan, a Justice Department attorney arguing in support of Chiles’ position, expanded on this concern, noting that the professional consensus in the 1970s was that being gay was a mental illness. He suggested that under Colorado’s theory, a state back then could have banned therapists from telling gay patients they weren’t mentally ill.Barrett and others pressed both sides on what evidence exists about harm from conversion therapy. Chiles’ attorney insisted Colorado “didn’t seriously consider any less restrictive alternatives, and Colorado can’t prove harm because it hasn’t cited a study focusing on what’s at issue here: voluntary speech between a licensed professional and a minor.” Colorado pointed to studies showing youth who undergo conversion therapy are nearly twice as likely to attempt suicide, including research examining over 34,000 participants. “The harm from it comes not from the aversive practice,” said Stevenson. “It comes from telling someone there’s something innate about yourself you can change. And then you spend all kinds of time and effort trying to do that, and you fail.”While it’s always dangerous to read too much into oral arguments, several justices appeared skeptical of Colorado’s position that regulating this speech requires only minimal judicial scrutiny. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito pressed Colorado’s attorney on what they characterized as “blatant viewpoint discrimination.” Alito presented a hypothetical about an adolescent male seeking help to overcome same-sex attraction he finds troubling, contrasted with a similar teen seeking help to embrace being gay. Under Colorado’s law, one would be permitted and the other banned. “Looks like blatant viewpoint discrimination,” said Alito, whose conclusion was seconded by liberal Justice Elena Kagan. The court’s three liberal justices appeared more sympathetic to Colorado’s medical regulation framework, though even Kagan acknowledged that if the scenarios were flipped — with a state banning therapy that affirms gay or trans identities — it would raise the same constitutional concerns. If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation.and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our
@Fbia Conversion-Therapy Lgbtq Section:/News
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court to hear free-speech clash over Colorado 'conversion therapy' banThe Supreme Court will hear a case brought by a licensed counselor in Colorado, who argues her state's ban on 'conversion therapy' violates her First Amendment rights.
Read more »
Supreme Court weighs conversion therapy in case from ColoradoThe case pits conservative Christian groups against the LGBTQ community.
Read more »
Supreme Court weighs conversion therapy in case from ColoradoThe case pits conservative Christian groups against the LGBTQ community.
Read more »
Supreme Court to hear arguments for Colorado conversion therapy case in new termThe Supreme Court will hear two arguments on Tuesday regarding a Colorado state law that bans licensed counselors from providing conversion therapy to minors.
Read more »
Christian therapist challenges Colorado 'conversion therapy' ban at Supreme CourtFox News Channel offers its audiences in-depth news reporting, along with opinion and analysis encompassing the principles of free people, free markets and diversity of thought, as an alternative to the left-of-center offerings of the news marketplace.
Read more »
Supreme Court to hear arguments for Colorado conversion therapy case in new termThe Supreme Court will hear two arguments on Tuesday regarding a Colorado state law that bans licensed counselors from providing conversion therapy to minors.
Read more »