Professor Cliff Rosky, a constitutional law and LGBTQ rights expert, filed an amicus brief with University of Utah Professor Lisa Diamond in the U.S. Supreme Court case Chiles v. Salazar (challenging the constitutionality of Colorado’s conversion therapy ban) on Aug. 25.
The brief corrects mischaracterizations of Rosky and Diamond’s research and provides current scientific consensus about:
- the distinction between naturally occurring sexual orientation fluidity and therapist-directed “conversion therapy” and
- the overwhelming evidence that sexual orientation change efforts are ineffective and pose grave risks of harm, especially to minors
Rosky explains that Chiles v. Salazar will decide whether state and local governments can enforce laws banning conversion therapy for minors.
“Professor Diamond and I submitted the brief for two reasons. First, conversion therapists have attempted to distort the meaning of our scholarship by quoting sentences out of context, in an attempt to cite it as a justification for conversion therapy. Our brief clarifies these distortions by pointing to adjacent sentences that specifically explain why conversion therapy is both harmful and ineffective,” he says. “Second, we have both fought to end the practice of conversion therapy. I was one of the primary drafters of Utah’s conversion therapy law. As we say in our brief, scientific studies have shown that more than 60% of children subjected to conversion therapy attempt suicide. We both regard the question before the Supreme Court as terribly important, because the lawsuit poses a clear and present danger to the lives of LGBTQ children.”