Judges at odds over new law that bans gay conversion therapy for teens

The Sacramento Bee ^ | 12/4/12 | Denny Walsh

[Clint N. Suhks]

In a rare development, two federal judges in Sacramento have come to opposite conclusions on the constitutionality of a new California law that bars the use of "gay conversion therapy" on minors.

On Tuesday morning, U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller ruled that the law prohibiting licensed mental health providers from steering patients under 18 away from gay and lesbian lifestyles does not infringe on the suing providers' constitutional guarantee of free speech.

Thus, she concluded, providers challenging the law are unlikely to prevail, and she refused to grant them a preliminary injunction precluding enforcement of the law, which is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1.

Late Monday, U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb found in a separate case raising the same issue that the new law does infringe on the free speech rights of providers.

[Gene Eric]

>> that bars the use of “gay conversion therapy” on minors.

Why would anyone wish to convert their child into a homosexual? That’s completely #d up.

[longtermmemmory]

reading this with the off brand medication free speech ruling, it would seem the law is set to go down in flames.

this is like communist voting. Once the election is over stop counting the votes. Once the abuse has cause recruiting, forbid treatment for the abuse.

[andyk]

I see. Preventing one person from talking to another is not an infringement of free speech. Got it.

[DManA]

But judges have no problem with “therapy” that chops off a child’s tally wacker, for his mental health.

[2nd Amendment]

Next it will be illegal to convert a democrat into a sane conservative.

[fwdude]

It figures that a woman judge would trash the Constitution but a man judge would have to set her straight.

No more woman judges - EVER!

[Does so]

Off-topic some, it was a Congresswoman who voted against war with Japan:

http://www.ovimagazine.com/art/8030