Attorney General

Texas Children’s Hospital fined for performing illegal ‘sex-rejecting’ procedures on minors #Catholic The historic settlement agreement between Texas Children’s Hospital, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the state of Texas has been fully executed, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said this week.Under the terms of the settlement agreement, first announced by Paxton’s office in May, Texas Children’s, the largest children’s hospital in the United States, said it would no longer provide “gender-transition” interventions, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, to minors, per Texas law.“This historic settlement is a resounding defeat for the radical gender ideology that has preyed on Texas children under the guise of ‘care,’” Paxton said in a press release Aug. 5.Per the executed agreement, Texas Children’s “will pay a total of million to resolve these claims,” with ,576,000 going to the state of Texas. It will also fund, for five years, a detransition clinic offering free restorative medical care to patients who previously underwent such procedures. The clinic must open by the end of October.“Texas Children’s has agreed to pay millions back to Texas,” Paxton said. “The detransition clinic, which is the first of its kind, must open within months. Activist doctors who harmed children have been fired.”The agreement also required the permanent termination and revocation of privileges for five physicians who performed these interventions.The hospital is permanently barred from rehiring or credentialing the doctors and must implement new compliance measures, including bylaw changes that will automatically revoke privileges for any physician who violates Texas law prohibiting such procedures on children.“This settlement sends an unmistakable message,” Paxton said. “If you put radical ideology over childrenʼs health, my office will go after you. We will continue to lead the way in stopping the far-left’s radical gender agenda.”The settlement agreement resolves a yearslong investigation of the hospital by the DOJ and the state of Texas that began after whistleblower allegations surfaced claiming the hospital had continued performing sex-change procedures on minors in secret even after state lawmakers made such procedures illegal.The Justice Department said in May that the Houston-based hospital had agreed to pay millions in civil penalties and damages for allegedly falsely billing Medicaid and other insurers for “pediatric sex-rejecting procedures.”The federal government had alleged that the hospital violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the False Claims Act, and federal fraud and conspiracy laws.Following the publication of a directive by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott that transgender procedures on minors that could be considered “child abuse” under existing state law, Texas Children’s announced in 2022 that it would cease “sex-change” therapies and procedures, citing concerns that these practices were potentially illegal.In 2023 Texas passed a law that explicitly banned puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and gender-transition surgeries for minors under 18.Nevertheless, at least three doctors associated with Texas Children’s — Richard Roberts, David Paul, and Kristy Rialon — continued to perform “sex-rejecting” procedures on children throughout 2022 and 2023, according to whistleblower evidence published by Christopher Rufo, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute.Rufo claimed that Rialon had been performing surgeries on minors ranging in age from 15 to as young as 1.Calling the settlement “historic,” Paxton said in May that it “will ensure that the deranged child mutilators who hurt our kids are fired and held accountable.”According to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the DOJ “will use every weapon at its disposal to end the destructive and discredited practice of so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ for children.”The Department of Justice noted that Texas Children’s cooperated with the investigation and took proactive steps that contributed to the resolution. The claims resolved in the settlement remain allegations, with no determination of liability.“I am grateful that Texas Children’s wants to be part of the solution and no longer the problem,” said Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general for the Civil Division.
Read More

Texas Children’s Hospital fined for performing illegal ‘sex-rejecting’ procedures on minors #Catholic The historic settlement agreement between Texas Children’s Hospital, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the state of Texas has been fully executed, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said this week.Under the terms of the settlement agreement, first announced by Paxton’s office in May, Texas Children’s, the largest children’s hospital in the United States, said it would no longer provide “gender-transition” interventions, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, to minors, per Texas law.“This historic settlement is a resounding defeat for the radical gender ideology that has preyed on Texas children under the guise of ‘care,’” Paxton said in a press release Aug. 5.Per the executed agreement, Texas Children’s “will pay a total of $10 million to resolve these claims,” with $8,576,000 going to the state of Texas. It will also fund, for five years, a detransition clinic offering free restorative medical care to patients who previously underwent such procedures. The clinic must open by the end of October.“Texas Children’s has agreed to pay millions back to Texas,” Paxton said. “The detransition clinic, which is the first of its kind, must open within months. Activist doctors who harmed children have been fired.”The agreement also required the permanent termination and revocation of privileges for five physicians who performed these interventions.The hospital is permanently barred from rehiring or credentialing the doctors and must implement new compliance measures, including bylaw changes that will automatically revoke privileges for any physician who violates Texas law prohibiting such procedures on children.“This settlement sends an unmistakable message,” Paxton said. “If you put radical ideology over childrenʼs health, my office will go after you. We will continue to lead the way in stopping the far-left’s radical gender agenda.”The settlement agreement resolves a yearslong investigation of the hospital by the DOJ and the state of Texas that began after whistleblower allegations surfaced claiming the hospital had continued performing sex-change procedures on minors in secret even after state lawmakers made such procedures illegal.The Justice Department said in May that the Houston-based hospital had agreed to pay millions in civil penalties and damages for allegedly falsely billing Medicaid and other insurers for “pediatric sex-rejecting procedures.”The federal government had alleged that the hospital violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the False Claims Act, and federal fraud and conspiracy laws.Following the publication of a directive by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott that transgender procedures on minors that could be considered “child abuse” under existing state law, Texas Children’s announced in 2022 that it would cease “sex-change” therapies and procedures, citing concerns that these practices were potentially illegal.In 2023 Texas passed a law that explicitly banned puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and gender-transition surgeries for minors under 18.Nevertheless, at least three doctors associated with Texas Children’s — Richard Roberts, David Paul, and Kristy Rialon — continued to perform “sex-rejecting” procedures on children throughout 2022 and 2023, according to whistleblower evidence published by Christopher Rufo, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute.Rufo claimed that Rialon had been performing surgeries on minors ranging in age from 15 to as young as 1.Calling the settlement “historic,” Paxton said in May that it “will ensure that the deranged child mutilators who hurt our kids are fired and held accountable.”According to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the DOJ “will use every weapon at its disposal to end the destructive and discredited practice of so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ for children.”The Department of Justice noted that Texas Children’s cooperated with the investigation and took proactive steps that contributed to the resolution. The claims resolved in the settlement remain allegations, with no determination of liability.“I am grateful that Texas Children’s wants to be part of the solution and no longer the problem,” said Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general for the Civil Division.

unitedyam

Texas Children’s will pay $10 million to resolve the claims, with $8,576,000 going to the state of Texas, as well as fund, for five years, a first-of-its kind detransition clinic.

Read More
Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.
Read More

Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.

unitedyam

Oklahoma’s Statewide Charter School Board wants to approve religious charter schools, but a ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court and efforts by the state attorney general prevent it from doing so.

Read More
Michigan ends restriction on Catholic counselors who treat kids with gender dysphoria #Catholic Catholic counselors in Michigan who offer Catholic-based “talk therapy” to children who struggle with gender dysphoria and gender identity will be allowed to continue their services, according to a federal court order issued on July 31.Government officials in Michigan have agreed they will not enforce the state ban on "conversion therapy” on the counselors who work for Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale Counties or any other counselors engaged in “talk therapy.”The Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.” This prohibited treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” This includes “efforts to change behavior or gender expression.”According to the law, counselors were allowed to offer “acceptance, support, or understanding” of a child who self-identifies with a gender inconsistent with his or her sex. The lawsuit filed by the Catholic Charities affiliate argued the law forced them to “affirm” that the child could identify with a gender that is inconsistent with his or her sex, which conflicts with Catholic teaching.The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.” The Vatican’s 2019 document “Male and Female He Created Them” teaches that sexual identity is a reality “given” through one’s biological and physiological nature. Officials in Michigan consented to a court order that acknowledges that the law — as enforced against the Catholic Charities affiliate — violates the counselors’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech.According to the court order, the state cannot enforce this law against the Catholic counselors or any other counselors in the state if the treatment “consists exclusively of talking.” The order is permanent and took effect immediately, upon the signature of Judge Jane M. Beckering.The Catholic Charities affiliate was represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund. Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the counselors, said in a statement that the order is “a major victory for children, counselors, and common sense.”“Kids who are hurting deserve compassion, not a one-way ticket to harmful drugs, hormones, and surgery,” he said. “Now counselors can offer compassionate counseling without fearing that state bureaucrats will come knocking.”This agreement comes four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a similar ban on “conversion therapy” in Colorado violated the First Amendment rights of counselors, warning the state-level bans “suppress speech based on viewpoint.”Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Michigan’s attorney general’s office, said in a statement to EWTN News that Michigan entered into the agreement because of the Supreme Court ruling, but added: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”A spokesperson for Whitmer also expressed disappointment in the agreement in a statement to EWTN News."Governor Whitmer believes that every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves,” the spokesperson said.“This order is disappointing and represents a step back for the LGBTQ+ community,” the spokesperson added. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. The governor will continue to fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals are protected from attacks and that their voices are heard.”In June, Oregonʼs Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists withdrew disciplinary action against Catholic counselors who engaged in similar talk therapy, citing the Supreme Court decision as its reason.
Read More

Michigan ends restriction on Catholic counselors who treat kids with gender dysphoria #Catholic Catholic counselors in Michigan who offer Catholic-based “talk therapy” to children who struggle with gender dysphoria and gender identity will be allowed to continue their services, according to a federal court order issued on July 31.Government officials in Michigan have agreed they will not enforce the state ban on "conversion therapy” on the counselors who work for Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale Counties or any other counselors engaged in “talk therapy.”The Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.” This prohibited treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” This includes “efforts to change behavior or gender expression.”According to the law, counselors were allowed to offer “acceptance, support, or understanding” of a child who self-identifies with a gender inconsistent with his or her sex. The lawsuit filed by the Catholic Charities affiliate argued the law forced them to “affirm” that the child could identify with a gender that is inconsistent with his or her sex, which conflicts with Catholic teaching.The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.” The Vatican’s 2019 document “Male and Female He Created Them” teaches that sexual identity is a reality “given” through one’s biological and physiological nature. Officials in Michigan consented to a court order that acknowledges that the law — as enforced against the Catholic Charities affiliate — violates the counselors’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech.According to the court order, the state cannot enforce this law against the Catholic counselors or any other counselors in the state if the treatment “consists exclusively of talking.” The order is permanent and took effect immediately, upon the signature of Judge Jane M. Beckering.The Catholic Charities affiliate was represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund. Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the counselors, said in a statement that the order is “a major victory for children, counselors, and common sense.”“Kids who are hurting deserve compassion, not a one-way ticket to harmful drugs, hormones, and surgery,” he said. “Now counselors can offer compassionate counseling without fearing that state bureaucrats will come knocking.”This agreement comes four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a similar ban on “conversion therapy” in Colorado violated the First Amendment rights of counselors, warning the state-level bans “suppress speech based on viewpoint.”Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Michigan’s attorney general’s office, said in a statement to EWTN News that Michigan entered into the agreement because of the Supreme Court ruling, but added: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”A spokesperson for Whitmer also expressed disappointment in the agreement in a statement to EWTN News."Governor Whitmer believes that every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves,” the spokesperson said.“This order is disappointing and represents a step back for the LGBTQ+ community,” the spokesperson added. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. The governor will continue to fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals are protected from attacks and that their voices are heard.”In June, Oregonʼs Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists withdrew disciplinary action against Catholic counselors who engaged in similar talk therapy, citing the Supreme Court decision as its reason.

unitedyam

A Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.”

Read More