February 4, 2014

The following excerpts are from the article “‘Gays’ choosing change get reprieve” by Bob Unruh and published on World Net Daily: “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which earlier affirmed a lower court ruling allowing the state of California to censor therapists’ statements to clients, now has agreed to put the decision on hold until the Supreme Court weighs in.”

“The state’s change-therapy ban essentially would allow counselors to encourage young clients to abandon heterosexuality and pursue homosexuality, but they would be forbidden from encouraging those same clients from abandoning homosexuality and pursuing heterosexuality.”

“The 9th Circuit, after it issued the ruling, then refused to rehear the case. But that prompted a heated dissent in which three of the judges pointed out that such speech restrictions are not allowed by the Constitution.”

“‘May California remove from the First Amendment’s ambit the speech of certain professionals when the state disfavors its content or its purpose? – The Supreme Court has definitely and unquestionably said ‘No.’ It is no longer within our discretion to disagree,’ said the minority opinion from Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain.”

“He was joined by two other judges in the dissent, which said, ‘Legislatures cannot nullify the First Amendment’s protections for speech by playing this labeling game.’

“‘Indeed,’ he said, ‘authoritative precedents have established that neither professional regulations generally, nor even a more limited subclass of rules, remain categorically outside of the First Amendment’s reach.’”

“Now, at the request of Liberty Counsel, which is fighting the California law and a similar one in New Jersey, the appellate bench decided it would stay its ruling.” …