The Supreme Court's First Blockbuster Case This Term Looks Pretty Fake

"On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case that seeks to undo a major triumph of the LGBTQ+ movement: bans on "conversion therapy" for gay and transgender minors. These laws, now on the books in more than half the states, prohibit licensed counselors from attempting to change a client's sexual orientation or gender identity if they are under 18."

"Curiously, they have done so by engineering a case riddled with distorted facts, fabricated injuries, and flimsy evidence. For instance, the plaintiff, Kaley Chiles, has disclaimed any desire to change her minor patients' sexual orientation or gender identity, so it is unclear why she has standing to challenge the law in question. Her lawyers insist that banning conversion therapy hurts patients who voluntarily seek it out, but their proof for this assertion is anonymous Reddit posts. Chiles' attorneys also claim that even LGBTQ+ advocates believe sexual orientation can be altered-but according to the very researchers cited in their brief, they "profoundly misrepresented" those findings through "deceptive" quotations."

Chiles v. Salazar asks the Supreme Court to reconsider state bans on conversion therapy for gay and transgender minors by framing those bans as violations of counselors' free-speech rights. More than half the states prohibit licensed professionals from attempting to change a minor's sexual orientation or gender identity, citing evidence that conversion therapy is ineffective and harmful for children and teenagers. The current challenge relies on a plaintiff who disclaims intent to change minors' orientations, anonymous online posts, and allegedly misrepresented research, raising questions about legal standing and factual support. A favorable ruling could roll back protections nationwide.

Read at Slate Magazine