"The Supreme Court's decision in Chiles v. Salazar is painful for anyone who cares about LGBTQ+ adolescents and has either survived so-called conversion therapy or learned about survivors' experiences."
"The court's eight justices, six conservatives and two liberals, failed to care, reserving their sympathy only for the petitioner, a therapist advocating conversion therapy."
"No one who experienced conversion therapy was present to tell how deeply words can wound, as the court took the case in a pre-enforcement posture."
"By wielding the pre-enforcement strategy in Chiles, the Alliance Defending Freedom replicated its 2023 win in another free speech challenge against Colorado."
The Supreme Court's ruling in Chiles v. Salazar reflects a troubling disregard for LGBTQ+ adolescents impacted by conversion therapy. The court's eight justices, comprising six conservatives and two liberals, showed empathy only for the therapist advocating conversion therapy, ignoring the experiences of survivors. The case was presented in a pre-enforcement posture, preventing affected individuals from sharing their stories. This approach mirrors a previous case where the court allowed a web designer to bypass antidiscrimination laws, further highlighting the court's bias against marginalized groups.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]