The fate of sexual orientation change efforts, or SOCE, defined by SB 1172 as practices to change a minor’s sexual orientation, are now before the Ninth Circuit on appeal of one of two contradictory rulings on preliminary injunction motions, the two being issued simultaneously by two judges of the U.S. district court in Sacramento.
The emergence of two opinions by the same court on the same subject in the same procedural context caused a great deal of press notoriety. The court had the option to join for hearing on the issuance of preliminary injunctions, a common question of fact or law, under Rule 42(a) in order to avoid unnecessary cost or delay, but it did not do so.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
