SCOTUS considers taking up challenge to “conversion therapy” ban

The Supreme Court may take up a case challenging a ban on so-called “conversion therapy” for minors.

“Conversion therapy” has been described as a form of psychological torture, which purports to change queer people’s sexual orientation. The American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association, and many other professional healthcare associations consider the practice harmful and say that it is based on pseudoscience. According to the Movement Advancement Project, the District of Columbia and 22 states currently have laws on the books banning the harmful practice for minors.

Related:

Conversion therapist will have to stop trying to turn kids straight after losing federal lawsuit

Brian Tingley claims that the children he tries to convert are all “willing,” even if their parents make them go to therapy.

One of those states is Washington, where state law bans licensed therapists from providing “conversion therapy” to children under 18. (The law does not apply to churches and religious groups.) But as USA Today reports, Brian Tingley, a licensed family counselor, has challenged the state’s law, claiming that it violates his rights to free speech and freedom of religion.

Stay connected to your community

Connect with the issues and events that impact your community at home and beyond by subscribing to our newsletter.

Daily

Weekly

Good News

Tingley cites a 2018 Supreme Court decision in which the court’s conservative majority ruled that a California law could not require so-called “crisis pregnancy centers,” which oppose abortion, to inform women about publicly funded abortion and contraception services. The justices ruled that the California law violated the First Amendment’s freedom of speech protections. As USA Today notes, a federal court of appeals in Atlanta relied on that decision to block enforcement of bans on “conversion therapy” in parts of Florida in 2020.

Tingley’s case was dismissed by a U.S. district court in Washington in 2021, with Judge Robert Bryan ruling that the state has the authority to regulate medical practice and that the law does not target Tingley on the basis of his religion as it applies to providers of all faiths. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Washington law last year and the full court refused to rehear the case in January.

According to USA Today, the Supreme Court could announce whether they will take up Tingley’s case or allow the lower court ruling to stand as early as Tuesday.

Tingley is represented by the hate group Alliance Defending Freedom, which also represented Christian web designer Lorie Smith in 303 Creative v. Elenis. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that Colorado’s anti-discrimination law violated Smith’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech by potentially requiring her to create wedding websites for same-sex couples in opposition to her religious beliefs. According to USA Today, Tingley’s lawyers have suggested that the decision in Smith’s case work in his favor.

But opponents of “conversion therapy,” like Laurel Stine, chief policy officer for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, note that the court has not taken up challenges to laws banning the practice. In 2017, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to California’s 2012 law banning state-licensed medical professionals from practicing “conversion therapy” on minors.

Casey Pick, director of law and policy for the Trevor Project, noted that lower courts have consistently upheld laws banning “conversion therapy” for minors. “There is no reason the Court should not do the same here and ensure that LGBTQ young people across the country continue to be protected from unprofessional, unscientific, and deeply harmful practices,” Pick said.

Stine said that even if the conservative-dominated court did take up Tingley’s case, she was confident that it would uphold the Washington law.