The U.S. Supreme Court recently overturned a ban on conversion therapy, and predictably, San Francisco's political class rushed to the microphones to announce that it won't happen here. Because nothing says good governance like performative press conferences about issues that were never really in doubt.
Let's be clear about where we stand: conversion therapy is pseudoscientific garbage. There is no credible evidence it works, and plenty of evidence it causes real psychological harm, particularly to minors. Any liberty-minded person should be deeply uncomfortable with the idea of subjecting kids to discredited treatments based on ideology rather than science.
But here's where we need to think carefully. The Supreme Court's ruling likely turned on First Amendment grounds — the question of whether the government can regulate what a licensed professional says to a client. That's a genuinely thorny constitutional question, and dismissing it outright because you don't like the practical outcome is intellectually lazy. Free speech protections exist precisely to cover speech we find uncomfortable or even repugnant.
So what's the right move? Protecting minors from harmful quackery doesn't require speech bans. It requires robust consumer protection enforcement, medical licensing accountability, and — here's the radical idea — letting parents and young adults access accurate information so they can make informed choices. You know, the things government is actually supposed to do.
What's less helpful is San Francisco leaders treating this as another opportunity for political theater. We've seen this playbook before: national controversy happens, City Hall issues strongly worded statements, everyone feels good, and meanwhile the city still can't figure out how to fill potholes or balance a budget.
Protect kids from pseudoscience? Absolutely. But maybe spend a little less time drafting symbolic resolutions and a little more time on the hundred other things San Franciscans actually need from their local government right now.
