The Wisconsin Supreme Court is currently assessing the legality of a legislative committee’s decision to block a state agency rule aimed at prohibiting “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ individuals. The arguments were presented on Thursday, highlighting the ongoing national discourse over LGBTQ+ rights and the tension between the Democratic governor and the GOP-controlled Legislature.
Understanding “Conversion Therapy”
“Conversion therapy” refers to a discredited practice intended to alter an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity to conform to heterosexual or traditional gender norms. This practice is banned in 20 states and several communities within Wisconsin. The state’s professional licensing board has classified it as unprofessional conduct since April 2024.
Advocates for the ban aim to prevent mental health professionals from attempting to change clients’ sexual orientation or gender identity. Abigail Swetz, executive director of Fair Wisconsin, notes the difficulty in obtaining precise data on the practice’s prevalence in the state. A ban could provide some data regarding licensed practitioners, although it wouldn’t cover religious institutions involved in such practices.
The Situation in Wisconsin
The Wisconsin Legislature’s Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules, controlled by Republicans, has blocked the “conversion therapy” ban twice. The current case before the liberal-majority Wisconsin Supreme Court will determine the ban’s future and examine whether the legislative committee has exceeded its authority by obstructing various regulations during Governor Tony Evers’ tenure.
Governor Evers’ lawsuit targets two committee votes: one blocking the “conversion therapy” ban and another hindering an update to commercial building standards. Republicans argue that their opposition is based on the licensing board’s authority, not the policy itself. Evers has been advocating for the ban since 2020, but it has been consistently thwarted by the Legislature.
Debating Legislative Authority
Liberal Justice Jill Karofsky criticized “conversion therapy,” describing it as “beyond horrific” and emphasizing its harmful impact on individuals. Other justices discussed the scope of legislative versus gubernatorial power in rule-making.
Attorney Misha Tseytlin, representing the Legislature, cited longstanding precedent, including a 1992 Wisconsin Supreme Court decision affirming the Legislature’s right to suspend agency rules. He warned that overturning this precedent could be highly disruptive. In contrast, Governor Evers argued that the committee’s actions usurp powers constitutionally assigned to the governor, rendering the 1992 ruling unworkable.
Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley contended that the state constitution clearly vests power in the Legislature, questioning the legitimacy of governance by an administrative state instead of elected representatives.
Beyond “Conversion Therapy”
The debate over “conversion therapy” is part of a broader conflict involving other blocked regulations related to environmental standards, vaccine mandates, and public health measures. Governor Evers alleges that the legislative committee has been exercising an unconstitutional “legislative veto.”
In a related issue, the court sided with Evers in July, ruling 6-1 against another legislative committee that was unlawfully hindering the state Department of Natural Resources’ financial activities. The current regulation-related issues were separated and addressed on Thursday. A written ruling from the court, which consists of a 4-3 liberal majority, is anticipated in the coming months.
