Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to ‘Conversion Therapy’ Ban

The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a motion to hear a challenge to a Washington state law banning “conversion therapy” on children, the end goal of which is changing the sexual orientation or gender identity of children. The case was brought by a Christian therapist who claims the 2018 law is an affront to his freedom of speech. 

The majority of the court turned away the plaintiff, Brian Tingley’s, appeal of a lower court decision to throw out the case. The justices rejected Tingley’s claim that Washington state was unlawfully censoring the way he speaks with his therapy clients, violating his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The State of Washington made the case, successfully might I add, that the law regulated professional conduct, not speech. Conversion therapy, as a practice, is a debunked, pseudoscientific method that tries to change an individual’s sexual orientation, gender identity or expression. 

Of course, the decision was criticized by members of the Supreme Court’s conservative activist wing. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh (I think it’s worth a reminder that two of whom have credible sexual harassment/abuse allegations levied against them) dissented to the decision to deny the case. The three made it clear they see this as a battle between the rights of religious people and the protection for LGBTQ+ individuals. 

Earlier this year, the court’s 6-3 conservative majority ruled that businesses could refuse to provide services to same-gender weddings under the veil of free speech. The dissent to the ruling called that decision a “license to discriminate.” 

Tingley, a licensed marriage and family therapist from Tacoma, says he believes sexual relationships outside of marriage between one man and one woman are “inconsistent with God’s design” and that “the sex each person receives at conception” is a “gift from God.” If that is how Tingley sees relationships, perhaps advising people on sexuality and marriage is not best career choice for him. 

Washington law prohibits licensed healthcare professionals from practicing therapies that “seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity” on minors. Those who violate the law can be subject to sanctions like censure, fines, and revoking of a professional’s license.

Although Tingley and conservative activists have tried to paint this law as extremely restrictive, the law still allows licensed therapists to promote conversion therapy and perform the practice on adults. Licensed therapists can even recommend other religious counselors to perform it as a “treatment.” What’s more, the law doesn’t apply to non-licensed counselors acting under the guise of a church or religious group, so the argument that the law discriminates against religious beliefs is rendered moot.  

In his dissent, Clarence Thomas focused on gender identity and asserted that Washington state silenced one side of what he called a “fierce public debate” on the issue by forbidding counselors from helping clients “accept their biological sex.” 

Thomas went on to say that the law was “viewpoint-based and content-based discrimination in its purest form.”

Once again, Thomas demonstrated willful ignorance to the pretext of the case, as the law still allows for counselors to promote this harmful pseudoscience to their adult clients. Furthermore, Thomas made it clear what his decision on the matter would have been, indicating that he never intended on giving the state of Washington a fair judgment on the matter. 

The term “conversion therapy” can be a bit misleading, as it implies the practice is a legitimate form of a therapy. The practice is varied, ranging from psychotherapy, hypnosis and aversion treatment (like shock therapy and inducing nausea) to discourage same-gender attraction or one’s gender expression. Washington state sided with the medical consensus that such a practice has been discredited and puts minors at increased risk of suicide and depression. Tingley remains adamant that there is no evidence licensed therapists have ever used abusive practices on children, which is an abject denial of the scientific and historical consensus on the impact of conversion therapy. 

Tingley claims he has had clients who sought help to reduce same-gender attraction or become more comfortable with their biological sex, and that the law allows the state to censor “professionals” like himself, targeting practitioners based on religion. Well Mr. Tingley, that doesn’t really seem to be the case here. It seems like, as long your clients are adults, they can consent to whatever kind of perverted version of reinforced Conservative christian ethics you pass off as “therapy,” even if that entails what is objectively torture. 

Tingley sued the state of Washington in 2021 and was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, an extreme conservative legal group who has argued for the re-criminalization of homosexuality in the United States. U.S. District Judge Robert Bryan initially dismissed the case. Bryan found that the law did not violate Tingley’s First Amendment rights and that it was “rationally related” to the state’s interest in protecting the well-being of minors. Bryan’s decision was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022. 

Washington argues that it is well within its legal purview to regulate professional conduct, even if doing so may impact professional speech. Twenty-six states and the District of Columbia restrict or prohibit conversion therapy on minors. 

Even though the practice is restricted, conversion therapy still happens in almost every U.S. state, despite what conservative ideologues might have you believe.