Login to Continue Learning
The Supreme Court heard arguments on whether Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy violates a counselor’s free speech rights. Here are key takeaways:
1. **Court’s Stance**: A majority of justices seemed sympathetic to the counselor’s claim that the ban infringes her First Amendment rights.
2. **Medical vs. Free Speech**: The state argues it is merely ensuring health care professionals follow proper standards of care, while the counselor contends there’s no evidence such talk therapy is harmful.
3. **Standing Issue**: Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted Colorado officials say the counselor’s description does not violate the ban, but her attorney argued otherwise and said she was currently being investigated due to anonymous complaints.
Related Post
4. **High Review Standard**: The court may apply a higher standard of review than lower courts did initially, which could result in the case either being resolved by the Supreme Court itself or sent back for further consideration.
5. **Effectiveness Dispute**: Colorado’s lawyer cited studies showing conversion therapy increases suicide attempts, while the counselor’s attorney disputed these findings, arguing they rely on biased sampling and self-reporting.
6. **Medical Consensus**: Justice Barrett asked if states can pick a side about proper standards of care, with Colorado’s solicitor general stating there is no dispute as medical experts do not support conversion therapy.
7. **Free Speech Protection**: The Justice Department argued the ban should face strict scrutiny under the First Amendment, highlighting that talk therapy has free speech protections.
8. **Tennessee Comparison**: The court compared this case to a Tennessee law that bans treatments for transgender children, noting differences in how each state targeted specific types of care (talk therapy vs. medical interventions).
The outcome will likely hinge on how the Supreme Court balances the protection of free speech with public health concerns.
