“The Supreme Court has recognized that physician speech is entitled to First Amendment protection because of the significance of the doctor-patient relationship,” the judge noted. That high court has concluded “At some point, a measure is no longer a regulation of a profession but a regulation of speech or of the press; beyond that point, the statute must survive the level of scrutiny demanded by the First Amendment.”

A judge in California has granted a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of California’s newest promotion of homosexuality: a proposed ban on any counseling involving sexual orientation change for minors.

Critics say the law would require all counselors dealing with minors to affirm homosexuality and all its variations under all circumstances, regardless of the requests of the minor or his or her parents.

“Because the court finds that SB 1172 is subject to strict scrutiny and is unlikely to satisfy this standard, the court finds that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their … claims based on violations of their rights to freedom of speech under the First Amendment,” U.S. District Judge William Shubb wrote in his opinion.

“Because plaintiffs have also shown that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction, that the balance of equities tips in their favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest, the court grants plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.”

The case was brought by the Pacific Justice Foundation on behalf of plaintiffs Donald Welch, Anthony Duk and Aaron Bitzer. They challenged a law adopted by majority Democrats in the state legislature and signed by Democrat Gov. Edmund Brown Jr., that would impose a ban on all such counseling.

According to the judge, the substance of the bill would prohibit a “‘mental health provider’ from engaging in ‘sexual orientation change efforts with a patient under 18 years of age’ under all circumstances.”

Welch, a licensed marriage and family therapist and minister, teaches that “human sexuality … is to be expressed only in a monogamous lifelong relationship between one man and one woman within the framework of marriage,” the judge wrote.

Duk is a physician whose patients include minors “‘struggling with’ homosexuality and bisexuality.” And Bitzer has been working to become a therapist.

“The Supreme Court has recognized that physician speech is entitled to First Amendment protection because of the significance of the doctor-patient relationship,” the judge noted. That high court has concluded “At some point, a measure is no longer a regulation of a profession but a regulation of speech or of the press; beyond that point, the statute must survive the level of scrutiny demanded by the First Amendment.”

“When applied to [counseling] performed through ‘talk therapy,’ SB 1172 will give rise to disciplinary action solely on the basis of what the mental health provider says or the message he or she conveys,” the judge said.

“When a mental health provider’s pursuit of [counseling] is guided by the provider’s or patient’s views of homosexuality, it is difficult, if not impossible, to view the conduct of performing [Sexual Orientation Change therapy] as anything but integrally intertwined with viewpoints, messages, and expression about homosexuality.”

The judge said the law simply was not content or viewpoint neutral.

And, he wrote, “The court has no difficulty in concluding that protecting an individual’s First Amendment rights outweighs the public’s interest in rushing to enforce an unprecedented law.

“Pending final resolution of this action, defendants are hereby enjoined from enforcing the provisions of SB 1172 (to be codified) … as against plaintiffs Donald Welch, Anthony Duk, and Aaron Bitzer.”

When the case was filed, Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice, said, “Of all the freedom-killing bills we have seen in our legislature the last several years, this is among the worst.

“This outrageous bill makes no exceptions for young victims of sexual abuse who are plagued with unwanted same-sex attraction, nor does it respect the consciences of mental health professionals who work in a church.”

The law, SB 1172, is from a legislature that also previously demanded that school children “celebrate” the life of pedophile Harvey Milk and banned any negative discussions about being “gay,” such as the short expected lifespan.

Developed at the behest of homosexual advocates, SB 1172 limits the ability of psychologists, therapists and others to help clients who want to change their sexual orientation.

The plan flatly bans the advice for minors, regardless of what the minor and his or her parents desire. It also demands a new consent form from adults that includes statements about sexual orientation with which many counselors disagree.

Pacific Justice, which has led the fight against the bill since its introduction last spring by Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, had sent staff members to lawmakers repeatedly to warn of the plan’s unconstitutionality.

Read More