The US Supreme Court annuls the ban on ‘conversion therapies’ for homosexual minors

El Periódico

He United States Supreme Court determined this Tuesday that States cannot ban so-called ‘conversion therapies’ to change the sexual orientation or gender identity of minors, a practice considered torture by the UN.

The high court justified its decision based on the First Amendment of the Constitutionwhich protects freedom of religion, expression, press and assembly. “The First Amendment constitutes a shield against any attempt to impose orthodoxy on thought or expression in this country,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court’s majority.

The decision, which was made by eight votes in favor, only had the opposed by progressive Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. The ruling is a response to the ban on conversion therapies that had been established by Colorado, one of the 20 states that have banned this practice. Technically, the Supreme Court’s decision does not annul the Colorado law, which is still in force, but it sends the matter to lower courts that will most likely rule in the same sense.

In 2019, Colorado enacted a law prohibiting mental health professionals from performing any practice or treatment, including talk therapy, that attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

Discredited by doctors

Violators face fines of up to $5,000 (about 4,300 euros) and may be suspended from practicing their profession or lose their permit. Conversion therapy, favored by some religious conservatives, seeks to have homosexual minors identify as heterosexual and transgender children to fit the gender at birth. This practice is discredited by medical organizations and scientific research has shown that Conversion therapy is ineffective and can even be dangerous, generating mental health problems.

The Trevor Project, an organization dedicated to preventing suicide in young LGBTI people, warned that the Supreme Court’s ruling is a “tragic step backwards.” On the other hand, the religious group First Liberty Institute celebrated the decision, considering that the freedom of professionals should not be “censored.”

source