13-4429 #39

CASE NO.
13-4429
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

TARA KING, ED.D., individually and on behalf of her patients, RONALD
NEWMAN, PH.D., individually and on behalf of his patients, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY
(NARTH), and AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS
(AACC),

Plaintiffs/Appellants,
v.

CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, Governor of the State of New Jersey, in his official
capacity, ERIC T. KANEFSKY, Director of the New Jersey Department of Law
and Public Safety: Division of Consumer Affairs, in his official capacity,
MILAGROS COLLAZO, Executive Director of the New Jersey Board of Marriage
and Family Therapy Examiners, in her official capacity, J. MICHAEL WALKER,
Executive Director of the New Jersey Board of Psychological Examiners, in his
official capacity; and PAUL JORDAN, President of the New Jersey State Board of
Medical Examiners, in his official capacity,

Defendants/Appellees,
And

GARDEN STATE EQUALITY,
Intervenor-Defendant/Appellee.
APPENDIX OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS VOL II (000071-000276)
Mathew D. Staver (Lead Counsel)
Anita L. Staver
LIBERTY COUNSEL
1055 Maitland Ctr. Cmmns 2d Floor
Maitland, FL 32751-7214
Tel. (800) 671-1776
Email court@lc.org
Attorneys for Appellants

Stephen M. Crampton
Mary E. McAlister
Daniel J. Schmid
LIBERTY COUNSEL
P.O. Box 11108
Lynchburg, VA 24506
Tel. (434) 592-7000
Email court@lc.org
Case: 13-4429 Document: 003111504690 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/10/2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME I (000001-000070)

Plaintiffs Notice of Appeal.............000001

Memorandum Opinion ...........000003

Order ...000069

VOLUME II (000071-000276)

District Court Docket Sheet.....000071

Complaint........000085

Complaint Exhibit A ...000131

Complaint Exhibit B ...000137

Application for Temporary Restraining Order and/or
Preliminary Injunction...000141

Declaration of Dr. Tara King...000167

Declaration of Dr. Ronald Newman....000174

Declaration of David Pruden...000181

Declaration of Dr. Christopher Rosik..000187

Declaration of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi..000231

Declaration of Dr. Eric Scalise000249

Garden State Equalitys Notice of Motion to Intervene
as Party Defendant ...000257

Certification of Troy Stevenson .000259

Defendants Notice of Cross-Motion for Summary
Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56...000272

Proposed Intervenor-Defendant Garden State Equalitys
Notice of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment .............000274

VOLUME III (000277-000449)

Exhibit C, Declaration of Gregory Herek, Report of the
American Psychological Association Task Force
on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to
Sexual Orientation ................................................................................000277

Rebuttal Declaration of Dr. Christopher Rosik ..................000415

Rebuttal Declaration of Dr. Ronald Newman.....000441

VOLUME IV (000450-000665)

Declaration of Dr. Judith Reisman .....000450

Declaration of John Doe, Minor Child ...000537

Declaration of Jane Doe, Mother of Minor Child ......000542

Declaration of Jack Doe, Father of Minor Child.000549

Plaintiffs Motion Objecting to Courts Dispensing with
Plaintiffs Supporting Declarations and Evidence,
Dispensing with Evidentiary Motions, and Motion
to Deem Certain Factual Allegations Admitted by
the State 000554

Transcript of Motions Hearing000588

CASE NO. 13-4429

(NARTH), and AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS
(AACC),

v.

official capacity; and PAUL JORDAN, President of the New Jersey State Board of

Defendants/Appellees,
And

Intervenor-Defendant/Appellee.
APPENDIX OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS VOL II (000071-000276)
Mathew D. Staver (Lead Counsel)
Anita L. Staver
LIBERTY COUNSEL
1055 Maitland Ctr. Cmmns 2d Floor
Maitland, FL 32751-7214
Tel. (800) 671-1776
Email court@lc.org

Stephen M. Crampton
Mary E. McAlister
Daniel J. Schmid
LIBERTY COUNSEL
P.O. Box 11108
Lynchburg, VA 24506
Tel. (434) 592-7000
Email court@lc.org
TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME I (000001-000070)

Plaintiffs Notice of Appeal.............000001

Memorandum Opinion ...........000003

Order ...000069

VOLUME II (000071-000276)

District Court Docket Sheet.....000071

Complaint........000085

Complaint Exhibit A ...000131

Complaint Exhibit B ...000137

Application for Temporary Restraining Order and/or
Preliminary Injunction...000141

Declaration of Dr. Tara King...000167

Declaration of Dr. Ronald Newman....000174

Declaration of David Pruden...000181

Declaration of Dr. Christopher Rosik..000187

Declaration of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi..000231

Declaration of Dr. Eric Scalise000249

Garden State Equalitys Notice of Motion to Intervene
as Party Defendant ...000257

Certification of Troy Stevenson .000259

Defendants Notice of Cross-Motion for Summary
Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56...000272

Proposed Intervenor-Defendant Garden State Equalitys
Notice of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment .............000274

VOLUME III (000277-000449)

Exhibit C, Declaration of Gregory Herek, Report of the
American Psychological Association Task Force
on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to
Sexual Orientation ................................................................................000277

Rebuttal Declaration of Dr. Christopher Rosik ..................000415

Rebuttal Declaration of Dr. Ronald Newman.....000441

VOLUME IV (000450-000665)

Declaration of Dr. Judith Reisman .....000450

Declaration of John Doe, Minor Child ...000537

Declaration of Jane Doe, Mother of Minor Child ......000542

Declaration of Jack Doe, Father of Minor Child.000549

Plaintiffs Motion Objecting to Courts Dispensing with
Plaintiffs Supporting Declarations and Evidence,
Dispensing with Evidentiary Motions, and Motion
to Deem Certain Factual Allegations Admitted by
the State 000554

Transcript of Motions Hearing000588

CASE NO. 13-4429
(NARTH), AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS
(AACC),
v.
official capacity; PAUL JORDAN, President of the New Jersey State Board of
Defendants/Appellees.
And
Intervenor-Defendant/Appellee

APPENDIX

VOLUME II, PAGES 71-311

APPENDIX (VOL. II) - PAGE 000071
APPEAL,CLOSED
U.S. District Court
District of New Jersey [LIVE] (Trenton)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:13-cv-05038-FLW-LHG

KING et al v. CHRISTIE et al
Assigned to: Judge Freda L. Wolfson
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Lois H. Goodman
Case in other court: Third Circuit, 13-04429
Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Date Filed: 08/22/2013
Date Terminated: 11/08/2013
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights:
Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Movant
GARDEN STATE EQUALITY represented by ANDREW BAYER
GLUCK WALRATH, LLP
428 RIVERVIEW PLAZA
TRENTON, NJ 08611
(609) 278-3900
Email: abayer@glucklaw.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Plaintiff

TARA KING, ED.D.
individually and on behalf of her
patients
represented by DEMETRIOS K. STRATIS
Law Office of Demetrios K. Stratis,
LLC
10-04 River Road
Fair Lawn, NJ 07410
201-794-6200
Fax: 201-794-6300
Email: dstratis@earthlink.net
LEAD ATTORNEY
Plaintiff

RONALD NEWMAN, PH.D.
Individually and on behalf of his
patients
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
Plaintiff

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR
RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH) LEAD ATTORNEY
Plaintiff

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS
LEAD ATTORNEY

V.
Defendant

CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE
Governor of the State of New Jersey,
in his official capacity
represented by SUSAN MARIE SCOTT
OFFICE OF THE NJ ATTORNEY
GENERAL
RJ HUGHES JUSTICE COMPLEX
PO BOX 112
TRENTON, NJ 08625
(609) 777-3410
Fax: (609) 943-4853
Email: susan.scott@dol.lps.state.nj.us
LEAD ATTORNEY

ERIC SCOTT PASTERNACK
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
DIVISION OF LAW
25 MARKET STREET
P.O. BOX 112
TRENTON, NJ 08625
609-292-8562
Fax: 609-943-4853
Email:
eric.pasternack@dol.lps.state.nj.us

ROBERT T. LOUGY
LIVISION OF LAW & PUBLIC
SAFETY
R.J. HUGHES JUSTICE COMPLEX
25 MARKET STREET
P.O. BOX 112
TRENTON, NJ 08625
609-599-6868
Email:
robert.lougy@dol.lps.state.nj.us
Defendant

ERIC T. KANEFSKY
Director of the New Jersey
Department of Law and Public
Safety: Division of Consumer Affairs,
in his official capacity
LEAD ATTORNEY


ROBERT T. LOUGY
Defendant

MILAGROS COLLAZO
Executive Diretor of the New Jersey
Board of Marriage and Family
Therapy Examiners, in her official
capacity
LEAD ATTORNEY


ROBERT T. LOUGY
Defendant

J. MICHAEL WALKER
Executive Director of the New Jersey
Board of Psychological Examiners, in
his official capacity
LEAD ATTORNEY


ROBERT T. LOUGY
Defendant

PAUL JORDAN
President of the New Jersey State
Board of Medical Examiners, in his
official capacity
LEAD ATTORNEY


ROBERT T. LOUGY

Date Filed # Docket Text
08/22/2013 1 COMPLAINT against CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, MILAGROS
COLLAZO, PAUL JORDAN, ERIC T. KANEFSKY, J. MICHAEL
WALKER ( Filing and Admin fee $ 400 receipt number 5189106), filed by
RONALD NEWMAN, PHD, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS, TARA KING, EDD, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH). (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2
Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B)(jjc) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, MILAGROS
COLLAZO, PAUL JORDAN, ERIC T. KANEFSKY, J. MICHAEL
WALKER Attached is the official court Summons, please fill out Defendant
and Plaintiffs attorney information and serve. Issued By *JAWEIA
CAMPBELL* (jjc) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 3 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS, TARA KING, EDD,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), RONALD NEWMAN, PHD.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Dr. Tara King, # 2 Exhibit
Declaration of Dr. Ronald Newman, # 3 Exhibit Declaration of David
Pruden, # 4 Exhibit Declaration of Dr. Christopher Rosik, # 5 Exhibit
Declaration of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, # 6 Exhibit Declaration of Dr. Eric
Scalise)(STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 4 MEMORANDUM in Support filed by AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS, TARA KING, EDD, NATIONAL
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), RONALD NEWMAN, PHD re 3
MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction
(STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 5 Proposed Pretrial Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order by AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN
COUNSELORS, TARA KING, EDD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR
RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH),
RONALD NEWMAN, PHD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered:
08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Stephen M. Crampton by
TARA KING, EDD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH
AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), RONALD
NEWMAN, PHD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 7 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Daniel J. Schmid by
TARA KING, EDD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH
AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), RONALD
NEWMAN, PHD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 8 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Mathew D. Staver by
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS, TARA
KING, EDD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND
THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), RONALD NEWMAN,
PHD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
08/23/2013 Set Deadlines as to 6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for
Stephen M. Crampton. Motion set for 9/16/2013 before Magistrate Judge
Lois H. Goodman. The motion will be decided on the papers. No
appearances required unless notified by the court. (eaj) (Entered:
08/23/2013)
Daniel J. Schmid. Motion set for 9/16/2013 before Magistrate Judge Lois H.
Goodman. The motion will be decided on the papers. No appearances
required unless notified by the court. (eaj) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
Mathew D. Staver. Motion set for 9/16/2013 before Magistrate Judge Lois
H. Goodman. The motion will be decided on the papers. No appearances
08/26/2013 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - Please be advised, pursuant
to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 7.1, a disclosure statement is required to be filed by a
nongovernmental corporate party. Please refer to the Court's website at
www.njd.uscourts.gov for a form and filing instructions. (jjc) (Entered:
08/26/2013)
08/26/2013 9 Corporate Disclosure Statement by AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered:
08/26/2013)
08/26/2013 10 Corporate Disclosure Statement by NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR
RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH).
08/27/2013 Text Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Freda L. Wolfson:
Telephone Conference held on 8/27/2013, Court set Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order for 10/1/2013 at 10:00 A.M.: Motion Hearing held on
8/27/2013 re 7 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Daniel J.
Schmid filed by RONALD NEWMAN, PH.D., NATIONAL
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), TARA KING, ED.D., Court Granted
Motion 8 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Mathew D.
Staver filed by RONALD NEWMAN, PH.D., NATIONAL
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), TARA KING, ED.D., AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS, Court Granted Motion
6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Stephen M. Crampton
filed by RONALD NEWMAN, PH.D., NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR
RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), TARA
KING, ED.D. Court Granted Motion. (jg, ) (Entered: 08/27/2013)
08/27/2013 11 Letter from Deputy Attorney General Susan M. Scott on behalf of the State
Defendants. (SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered: 08/27/2013)
08/27/2013 12 NOTICE of Appearance by SUSAN MARIE SCOTT on behalf of All
Defendants (SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered: 08/27/2013)
08/27/2013 13 TEXT ORDER Setting Briefing schedule as to 3 Motion for
TRO/Preliminary Injunction. Defendants' opposition is due 9-13-13;
Plaintiffs' reply is due 9-20-13; Motion hearing date is 10-1-13 at 10:00
A.M. The Court will treat 3 Motion by Plaintiffs as a Motion for Summary
Judgment. Ordered by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 8/27/2013. (jg, )
(Entered: 08/27/2013)
08/27/2013 14 NOTICE of Appearance by ROBERT T. LOUGY on behalf of All
Defendants (LOUGY, ROBERT) (Entered: 08/27/2013)
08/27/2013 15 NOTICE of Appearance by ERIC SCOTT PASTERNACK on behalf of
CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, MILAGROS COLLAZO, PAUL
JORDAN, ERIC T. KANEFSKY, J. MICHAEL WALKER
(PASTERNACK, ERIC) (Entered: 08/27/2013)
08/28/2013 16 ORDER granting the 6 , 7 & 8 Motions for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice
as to Stephen M. Crampton, Esq., Mathew D. Staver, Esq. and Daniel J.
Schmid, Esq.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lois H. Goodman on 8/27/2013.
(eaj) (Entered: 08/28/2013)
08/28/2013 17 Letter from Deputy Attorney General Susan M. Scott on behalf of
Defendants. (SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered: 08/28/2013)
09/03/2013 18 BRIEF in Support filed by AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN
COUNSELORS, TARA KING, EDD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR
RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH),
RONALD NEWMAN, PHD re 3 MOTION for Temporary Restraining
Order (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/03/2013)
09/06/2013 19 MOTION to Intervene by Garden State Equality. (Attachments: # 1 Brief
Memo of Law, # 2 Affidavit Stevenson Affidavit, # 3 Affidavit Bayer
Affidavit, # 4 Text of Proposed Order Order)(BAYER, ANDREW)
(Entered: 09/06/2013)
09/06/2013 20 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Garden State Equality.
(Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Barday Affidavit, # 2 Affidavit Broadwater
Affidavit, # 3 Affidavit Flugman Affidavit, # 4 Affidavit Holozubiec
Affidavit, # 5 Affidavit Orr Affidavit, # 6 Affidavit Welz Affidavit, # 7
Affidavit Minter Affidavit, # 8 Affidavit Stoll Affidavit, # 9 Affidavit
Whelan Affidavit, # 10 Text of Proposed Order Order)(BAYER,
ANDREW) (Entered: 09/06/2013)
09/09/2013 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - Several Affidavits
(attachments to docket entries 19 and 20 ) submitted by Andrew Bayer on
9/6/2013 contain improper signatures. Only the filing user is permitted to
sign electronically filed documents with an s/. PLEASE RESUBMIT THE
DOCUMENTS WITH PROPER HAND SIGNATURES. This submission
will remain on the docket unless otherwise ordered by the court. (jjc)
(Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - This message is in
reference to the 19 Motion to Intervene filed by Andrew Bayer on 9/6/2013.
Please be advised that the Clerk's office has modified party GARDEN
STATE EQUALITY to reflect that they are a Movant as opposed to an
Intervenor Defendant. Additionally, please be advised that address
information for a represented party should not be placed on the docket. This
message is for informational purposes only. (mmh) (Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 Set Deadlines as to 19 MOTION to Intervene . Motion set for 10/7/2013
before Judge Freda L. Wolfson. The motion will be decided on the papers.
No appearances required unless notified by the court. (jjc) (Entered:
09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 Set Deadlines as to 20 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice .
Motion set for 10/7/2013 before Magistrate Judge Lois H. Goodman. The
motion will be decided on the papers. No appearances required unless
notified by the court. (jjc) (Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 21 Notice of Request by Pro Hac Vice Mathew D. Staver to receive Notices of
Electronic Filings. ( Pro Hac Vice fee $ 150 receipt number 0312-5216323.)
09/09/2013 22 Notice of Request by Pro Hac Vice Stephen M. Crampton to receive
Notices of Electronic Filings. ( Pro Hac Vice fee $ 150 receipt number
0312-5216422.) (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 23 Notice of Request by Pro Hac Vice Daniel J. Schmid to receive Notices of
Electronic Filings. ( Pro Hac Vice fee $ 150 receipt number 0312-5216433.)
09/09/2013 24 AFFIDAVIT of Stevenson re 19 MOTION to Intervene by GARDEN
STATE EQUALITY. (BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 25 AFFIDAVIT of Barday, Flugman, Orr and Welz re 20 MOTION for Leave
to Appear Pro Hac Vice by GARDEN STATE EQUALITY. (Attachments:
# 1 Affidavit Flugman Signed, # 2 Affidavit Orr Signed, # 3 Affidavit Welz
Signed)(BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/09/2013 26 TEXT ORDER. The return date for the motion to intervene, filed by
Proposed Intervenor Garden State Equality, is set for October 1, 2013. Any
opposition to that motion shall be filed by September 17, 2013. The
Proposed Intervenor's response shall be filed by September 24, 2013. In
addition, in light of the emergent nature of this matter, the Proposed
Intervenor shall also file its proposed submission in opposition to Plaintiffs'
motion for preliminary injunction by September 13, 2013. Ordered by
Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 09/09/2013. (Fang, W) (Entered: 09/09/2013)
09/11/2013 27 MOTION for Reconsideration re 26 Order,, by TARA KING, EDD.
09/11/2013 Set Deadlines as to 27 MOTION for Reconsideration re 26 Order,, . Motion
set for 10/7/2013 before Judge Freda L. Wolfson. The motion will be
decided on the papers. No appearances required unless notified by the court.
(eaj) (Entered: 09/11/2013)
09/11/2013 28 MEMORANDUM in Support filed by TARA KING, EDD re 27 MOTION
for Reconsideration re 26 Order,, and in Opposition to Garden State
Equality's Motion to Intervene (Attachments: # 1 Attachment)(STRATIS,
DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/11/2013)
09/13/2013 29 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment by CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE,
MILAGROS COLLAZO, PAUL JORDAN, ERIC T. KANEFSKY, J.
MICHAEL WALKER. (Attachments: # 1 Brief, # 2 Statement of Material
Facts, # 3 Declaration of Jack Drescher, M.D., # 4 Text of Proposed Order,
# 5 Certificate of Service)(SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered: 09/13/2013)
09/13/2013 30 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment by GARDEN STATE
EQUALITY. Responses due by 9/20/2013 (Attachments: # 1 Brief, # 2
Statement Undisputed Facts, # 3 Declaration Douglas G. Haledman, # 4
Declaration Laura Davies, # 5 Declaration Gregory M. Herek - Part 1, # 6
Declaration Gregory M. Herek - Part 2, # 7 Declaration Gregory M. Herek -
Part 3, # 8 Certification Andrew Bayer, Esq., # 9 Objections to Plaintiffs'
Declarations, # 10 Text of Proposed Order on Cross-Motion for Summary
Judgment, # 11 Text of Proposed Order on Objections to Plaintiffs'
Declarations, # 12 Certificate of Service)(BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered:
09/13/2013)
09/16/2013 Set Deadlines as to 29 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion set
for 10/7/2013 before Judge Freda L. Wolfson. The motion will be decided
on the papers. No appearances required unless notified by the court. (eaj)
(Entered: 09/16/2013)
09/16/2013 Set Deadlines as to 30 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion set
for 10/7/2013 before Judge Freda L. Wolfson. The motion will be decided
on the papers. No appearances required unless notified by the court. (eaj)
(Entered: 09/16/2013)
09/16/2013 31 TEXT ORDER denying 27 Motion for Reconsideration; granting 19 Motion
to Intervene. Plaintiffs move for reconsideration of this Courts briefing
schedule regarding Proposed Intervenors motion for intervention. The Court
held a telephone conference wherein counsel for Plaintiffs, the State
Defendants and Proposed Intervenor participated. During the conference
call and in their papers, counsel for Plaintiffs argued that the truncated
briefing schedule would prejudice their interests by having to respond to
Proposed Intervenor's motion and its proposed objections to Plaintiffs'
motion for summary judgment, and Plaintiffs also argue, generally, that
intervention is improper based on various reasons. Having considered
Plaintiffs position, this Court GRANTS Proposed Intervenor's motion to
intervene and DENIES Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. Briefing for
Plaintiffs' converted motion for summary judgment shall proceed as
scheduled, with argument for Plaintiffs' motion and Defendants' cross-
motions to be held on October 1, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. In addition, the Court's
reasoning for granting the motion for intervention will be set forth more
fully in this Courts written opinion. Ordered by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on
9/16/2013. (Fang, W) (Entered: 09/16/2013)
09/20/2013 32 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages for Joint Reply by TARA KING,
EDD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/20/2013)
09/20/2013 33 BRIEF Joint Reply in Support of Converted Motion for Summary
Judgment/Response to Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment
(Attachments: # 1 Declaration Rosik Rebuttal, # 2 Declaration Newman
Rebuttal, # 3 Declaration Reisman Rebuttal, # 4 Declaration John Doe, # 5
Declaration Jane Doe, # 6 Declaration Jack Doe)(STRATIS, DEMETRIOS)
(Entered: 09/20/2013)
09/20/2013 34 STATEMENT of Undisputed Material Facts by TARA KING, EDD.
09/20/2013 35 RESPONSE. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/20/2013)
09/20/2013 38 MOTION to Strike Defendants and Intervenor-Defendants Declarations by
TARA KING, EDD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/20/2013)
09/23/2013 Set Deadlines as to 32 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages for Joint
Reply. Motion set for 10/21/2013 before Magistrate Judge Lois H.
Goodman. The motion will be decided on the papers. No appearances
09/23/2013 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - The Response in Objection
to Defendants Evidence in Support of their Cross-Motions for Summary
Judgment 38 filed by Demetrios Stratis on 9/20/2013 was submitted
incorrectly as a Motion to Strike. If you wish to file a Motion, you must file
a Notice of Motion and all of the required documentation in support of your
Motion. The Calender event created by this incorrect filing has been
terminated. This submission will remain on the docket unless otherwise
ordered by the court. (eaj) (Entered: 09/23/2013)
09/24/2013 39 ORDER granting 32 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages.
Signed by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 9/23/2013. (eaj) (Entered:
09/24/2013)
09/24/2013 40 LETTER ORDER granting the Defendants and Intervenors requests to file a
brief reply to Plaintiffs' opposition to the State's cross-motion for Summary
Judgment by 10:00 AM on 9/26/2013. Signed by Judge Freda L. Wolfson
on 9/24/2013. (eaj) (Entered: 09/24/2013)
09/25/2013 41 REPLY to Response to Motion filed by CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE,
MICHAEL WALKER re 29 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment
(SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered: 09/25/2013)
09/26/2013 42 BRIEF in Support filed by GARDEN STATE EQUALITY re 30 Cross
MOTION for Summary Judgment (BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered:
09/26/2013)
09/26/2013 43 REPLY to Response to Motion filed by GARDEN STATE EQUALITY re
30 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 Declaration
Objections to Declarations)(BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered: 09/26/2013)
09/26/2013 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - The Brief 42 and Reply to
Response 43 submitted by Andrew Bayer on 9/26/2013 appear to be
duplicates. Please refer to the 43 Reply to Response for documents. These
submissions will remain on the docket unless otherwise ordered by the
court. This message is for informational purposes only. (jjc) (Entered:
09/26/2013)
09/27/2013 44 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply/Reply in Support of Converted Motion
for Summary Judgment by TARA KING, EDD. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed
Surreply-Reply Brief)(STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 09/27/2013)
09/27/2013 Set Deadlines as to 44 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply/Reply in
Support of Converted Motion for Summary Judgment. Motion set for
10/21/2013 before Judge Freda L. Wolfson. The motion will be decided on
the papers. No appearances required unless notified by the court. (eaj)
(Entered: 09/27/2013)
10/01/2013 46 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Freda L. Wolfson: Motion
Hearing held on 10/1/2013 re 3 CONVERTED MOTION for Summary
Judgment filed by RONALD NEWMAN, PH.D., NATIONAL
HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), TARA KING, ED.D., AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS, 30 Cross MOTION for
Summary Judgment filed by GARDEN STATE EQUALITY, 29 Cross
MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by PAUL JORDAN, MILAGROS
COLLAZO, CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, J. MICHAEL WALKER,
ERIC T. KANEFSKY, Court Reserved Decision; Opinion & Order to be
filed. Motions terminated: 44 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply/Reply in
Support of Converted Motion for Summary Judgment filed by TARA
KING, ED.D. Dismissed as Moot. (Court Reporter/Recorder Vincent
Russoniello.) (jg, ) (Entered: 10/01/2013)
10/04/2013 47 BRIEF in Opposition to Garden State Equality Standing (Attachments: # 1
Attachment)(STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 10/04/2013)
10/11/2013 48 REPLY to Response to Motion filed by GARDEN STATE EQUALITY re
30 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment Related to Motion to Intervene
(BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered: 10/11/2013)
10/11/2013 49 ORDER granting 20 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to
SHANNON PRICE MINTER, ESQ., CHRISTOPHER STOLL ESQ.,
Francis Holozubiec, Esq., David S. Flugman, Esq., Brett J. Broadwater,
Esq., Shireen A. Barday, Esq., Andrew J. Welz, Esq., Andrew C. Orr and
AMY WHELAN ESQ.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lois H. Goodman on
10/11/2013. (eaj) Modified on 10/24/2013 (eaj, ). (Entered: 10/11/2013)
10/11/2013 50 MOTION Reconsider Dispensing of Evidence and Deem Certain Facts
Admitted by TARA KING, EDD. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered:
10/11/2013)
10/15/2013 51 RESPONSE in Opposition filed by CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE,
MICHAEL WALKER re 50 MOTION Reconsider Dispensing of Evidence
and Deem Certain Facts Admitted (SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered:
10/15/2013)
10/16/2013 52 RESPONSE in Opposition filed by GARDEN STATE EQUALITY re 50
MOTION Reconsider Dispensing of Evidence and Deem Certain Facts
Admitted (BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered: 10/16/2013)
10/16/2013 53 ANSWER to Complaint and Affirmative Defenses by GARDEN STATE
EQUALITY.(BAYER, ANDREW) (Entered: 10/16/2013)
10/18/2013 Pro Hac Vice fee received as to SHANNON PRICE MINTER, ESQ.,
CHRISTOPHER STOLL LSQ and AMY WHELAN ESQ: $ 450, receipt
number TRE037332 (eaj) (Entered: 10/18/2013)
10/18/2013 54 NOTICE by TARA KING, EDD re 50 MOTION Reconsider Dispensing of
Evidence and Deem Certain Facts Admitted (Attachments: # 1
Attachment)(STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 10/18/2013)
10/22/2013 Set Deadlines as to 50 MOTION Reconsider Dispensing of Evidence and
Deem Certain Facts Admitted . Motion set for 11/4/2013 before Magistrate
Judge Lois H. Goodman. The motion will be decided on the papers. No
appearances required unless notified by the court. (eaj, ) (Entered:
10/22/2013)
10/24/2013 Pro Hac Vice fee received as to SHANNON PRICE MINTER, ESQ.,
CHRISTOPHER STOLL ESQ., Francis Holozubiec, Esq., David S.
Flugman, Esq., Brett J. Broadwater, Esq., Shireen A. Barday, Esq., Andrew
J. Welz, Esq., Andrew C. Orr and AMY WHELAN ESQ: $ 900, receipt
number TRE037474 (eaj) (Entered: 10/24/2013)
11/01/2013 55 NOTICE by TARA KING, EDD Supplemental Authority (STRATIS,
DEMETRIOS) (Entered: 11/01/2013)
11/05/2013 56 Letter from Deputy Attorney General Susan M. Scott on behalf of the State
Defendants in response to Plaintiff's Citation of Supplemental Authority re
55 Notice (Other). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Text Corrections for DSM-5
(10/31/13))(SCOTT, SUSAN) (Entered: 11/05/2013)
11/08/2013 57 OPINION filed. Signed by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 11/8/2013. (eaj)
(Entered: 11/08/2013)
11/08/2013 58 ORDER granting Garden States Motion to Intervene; Granting 29
Defendants Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; granting Garden State's
30 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 50 Plaintiff's Motion to
Reconsider Dispensing of Evidence and Deem Certain Facts Admitted.
Signed by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 11/8/2013. (eaj) (Entered:
11/08/2013)
11/08/2013 59 NOTICE by TARA KING, EDD of Appeal (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS)
(Entered: 11/08/2013)
11/12/2013 CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - The Notice of Appeal 59
filed by Demetrios Stratis on 11/8/2013 was submitted incorrectly as a
Notice. PLEASE RESUBMIT THE Notice of Appeal USING the Correct
event Notice of Appeal (USCA Philadelphia) which can be found under
Civil Events - Other Filings - Appeal Documents. This submission will
remain on the docket unless otherwise ordered by the court. (eaj) (Entered:
11/12/2013)
11/12/2013 60 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 58 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,,
Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion for TRO,,,, by
TARA KING, EDD. Filing fee $ 455, receipt number 0312-5345393. The
Clerk's Office hereby certifies the record and the docket sheet available
through ECF to be the certified list in lieu of the record and/or the certified
copy of the docket entries. (STRATIS, DEMETRIOS) (Entered:
11/12/2013)
11/18/2013 61 USCA Case Number 13-4429 for 60 Notice of Appeal (USCA), filed by
TARA KING, ED.D.. USCA Case Manager Maria Reyes (Document
Restricted - Court Only) (ca3mlb, ) (Entered: 11/18/2013)
11/26/2013 62 Transcript of MOTION HEARING held on 10/1/2013, before Judge
FREDA L. WOLFSON. Court Reporter/Transcriber Vincent Russoniello
(609-588-9516). NOTICE REGARDING REDACTION OF
TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the
Court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this Transcript. Redaction
Request due 12/17/2013. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 12/27/2013.
Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/24/2014. (eaj) (Entered:
11/26/2013)

Complaint for Declaratory Judgment, Injunctive Relief, and Nominal Damages - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN DIVISION

TARA KING, ED.D., individually and on
behalf of her patients, RONALD
NEWMAN, PH.D., individually and on
behalf of his patients, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND
THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY
(NARTH), AMERICAN ASSOCIATION
OF CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS
(AACC),

Plaintiffs,
v.

CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, Governor
of the State of New Jersey, in his official
capacity, ERIC T. KANEFSKY, Director
of the New Jersey Department of Law and
Public Safety: Division of Consumer Affairs,
in his official capacity, MILAGROS
COLLAZO, Executive Director of the New
Jersey Board of Marriage and Family
Therapy Examiners, in her official capacity,
J. MICHAEL WALKER, Executive
Director of the New Jersey Board of
Psychological Examiners, in his official
capacity; PAUL JORDAN, President of the
New Jersey State Board of Medical
Examiners, in his official capacity,

Defendants.

Case No. ________

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND
NOMINAL DAMAGES

The Plaintiffs in this case are Dr. Tara King, 522 Brick Blvd., Brick, New Jersey 08723,
Dr. Ronald Newman, Linwood Professional Plaza, Suite 9, 2021 New Rd. Linwood, New Jersey
08221, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, 5282 S.
Case 3:13-cv-05038-FLW-LHG Document 1 Filed 08/22/13 Page 1 of 46 PageID: 1

Commerce Drive, Suite D-272, Murray, Utah 84107, and the American Association of Christian
Counselors, 129 Vista Centre Dr., Forest, Virginia 24551. The Defendants in this case are
Governor Chris Christie, P.O. Box 001, Trenton, New Jersey 08625, Eric Kanefsky, Director of
the New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety, Division of Consumer Affairs, 124 Halsey
Street, Newark, New Jersey 07102, Milagros Collazo, Executive Director of the New Jersey
Board of Marriage and Family Therapy Examiners, P.O. Box 45007, Newark, New Jersey 07101,
J. Michael Walker, Executive Director of the New Jersey Board of Psychological Examiners,
P.O. Box 45017, Newark, New Jersey 07101, Paul Jordan, President of the New Jersey State
Board of Medical Examiners, P.O. Box 183, Trenton, New Jersey 08625.
COME NOW Plaintiffs, DR. TARA KING, DR. RONALD NEWMAN, on behalf of
themselves and their patients, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND
THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), and the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS (AACC) (collectively Plaintiffs), by and through counsel and
file this civil action to respectfully request this Court to issue Injunctive and Declaratory Relief
and award nominal Damages for constitutional violations described below. In support, Plaintiffs
aver unto the Court as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiffs bring this civil action to challenge the constitutionality of New Jersey
Assembly Bill Number 3371, An Act concerning the protection of minors from attempts to
change sexual orientation, (A3371), and to prevent A3371 from violating their respective
federal and state constitutional guarantees of Freedom of Speech, Free Exercise of Religion, and
the minor patient. This law went into full effect immediately, upon being signed by Governor
Christie on August 19, 2013, and thus time is of the essence to obtain judicial relief because

Plaintiffs, their clients, and the members of the Plaintiff Associations are currently
suffering immediate and irreparable injury to their most cherished constitutional liberties.
2. Plaintiffs Dr. Tara King, Dr. Ronald Newman, and other NARTH members in and
outside of New Jersey, as well as AACC members in and outside of New Jersey who either
engage in or refer to someone who engages in licensed counseling that honors a clients
autonomy and right to self-determination to prioritize their religious and moral values above
unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identities and who want to align their values
with a licensed counselor who can address these values, have the First Amendment and state
constitutional rights as licensed counselors, as do their clients, to engage in, receive and exercise
constitutionally protected speech and religious freedom, which includes their clients right of
self-determination, their right to provide and receive effective counsel based on their religious
and moral values, and their right to counsel their clients without governmentally imposed and
unconstitutional viewpoint-based restrictions.
3. By preventing minors from seeking counseling from to address the conflict about or
questions concerning their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, and identities and
from seeking to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or
identities through counseling such as sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE), A3371 denies
or severely impairs Plaintiffs clients and all minors their right to self-determination, their right
to prioritize their religious and moral values, and their right to receive effective counseling
consistent with those values.
4. By denying Plaintiffs clients and all minors access to counseling from licensed
counselors that can help minors who desire to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity, A3371 infringes on the fundamental rights of Plaintiffs clients,

and the rights of the parents of Plaintiffs clients to direct the upbringing and education of their
children, which includes the right to meet each childs individual counseling, developmental, and
spiritual needs.
5. By prohibiting them from engaging in any efforts that seek to eliminate or reduce
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, even when the client, the parents, and the
psychotherapist all consent to the counseling and therapeutic intervention, A3371 also violates
the constitutional rights of licensed mental health counselors, including Plaintiffs Dr. King, Dr.
Newman, and other members of NARTH and AACC, who practice SOCE counseling or who
refer to someone who does practice SOCE counseling.
6. Despite the value and benefit that Plaintiffs have provided by offering SOCE
counseling, Defendants have passed and are enforcing A3371 to stop all SOCE counseling by
licensed professionals, which is causing immediate and irreparable harm to all Plaintiffs and
Plaintiffs clients, including the counselors and their clients represented by the Plaintiff
Associations.
7. A3371 harms minors, their parents/guardians, and licensed counselors by prohibiting
minors and their parents/guardians from obtaining the counseling services they choose, after
receiving full disclosure and providing informed consent, to resolve or reduce unwanted same-
sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity and harms counselors by placing them in a catch-22
in which they will be forced to choose between violating ethical codes by complying with A3371
or violating the law by failing to comply with A3371.
8. By denying minors the opportunity to pursue a particular course of action that can
most effectively help them address the conflicts between their desire to be free of unwanted
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and their experience of feeling same-sex attractions,

behavior, or identity, A3371 is causing those minors confusion and anxiety over same-sex sexual
attractions, behaviors, and identity that the minors must balance, resolve, and/or eliminate, and it
is infringing on their free speech and religious liberty rights.
9. Consequently, Plaintiffs seek preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining
Defendants from enforcing A3371 because it violates: (1) the rights of Plaintiffs and their clients
to freedom of speech and free exercise of religion, guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth
Amendments to the United States Constitution, and (2) the rights of Plaintiffs and their patients
to liberty of speech and free exercise and enjoyment of religion, guaranteed by Article I, 3, 5,
and 6 of the New Jersey Constitution, and (3) the Fourteenth Amendment rights of the parents of
Plaintiffs clients to direct the upbringing of their children.
10. Plaintiffs also seek declaratory relief from this Court declaring that A3371 is
unconstitutional on its face and as applied.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
11. This action arises under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
Constitution, 42 U.S.C. 1983, and Article I, 3, 5, and 6 of the New Jersey Constitution.
12. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1343, and
1367.
13. This Court is authorized to grant the Plaintiffs prayer for relief regarding costs,
including reasonable attorneys fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988.
14. This Court is authorized to grant declaratory judgment pursuant to the Declaratory
Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. 2201-02, implemented through Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 57,
and to issue the preliminary and permanent injunctive relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 65.

15. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). Each and all of the acts alleged herein
were done and are being done by Defendants, and each of them, not as individuals, but under the
color and pretense of statutes, ordinances, regulations, customs, and uses of the United States of
America and of the State of New Jersey.
PARTIES
Plaintiffs
16. Plaintiff Dr. Tara King is a Licensed Professional Counselor, a certified Substance
Awareness Coordinator, a Licensed Clinical Alcohol and Drug Counselor, and the Founder of
King of Hearts Counseling Center, LLC, in New Jersey.
17. Plaintiff Dr. Ronald Newman is a New Jersey licensed psychologist, a Board
Certified Professional Christian Counselor, and the Founder of the Christian Counseling
Consortium of South Jersey.
18. Plaintiff National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality
(NARTH), is a nonprofit, professional, scientific organization incorporated under the laws of
the State of Utah. NARTH has members who reside and practice in New Jersey, and also has
members outside of New Jersey, some of whom are licensed in New Jersey.
19. Plaintiff American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC) is a nonprofit
professional, scientific association, founded in 1989 and headquartered in the Commonwealth of
Virginia with 50,000 members located in New Jersey and throughout the world. AACCs clinical
members include Licensed Professional Counselors, Licensed Mental Health Counselors,
Licensed Marriage & Family Therapists, Licensed Clinical Social Workers, Licensed Clinical
Psychologists, Licensed Substance Abuse Treatment Providers, Clinical Nurse Specialists, and
Psychiatrists.

Defendants
20. Defendant Christopher J. Christie is Governor of the State of New Jersey and is
responsible for executing the laws of New Jersey.
21. Defendant Eric T. Kanefsky is Director of the New Jersey Department of Law and
Public Safety: Division of Consumer Affairs and is responsible for overseeing the departments
charged with civil rights, enforcement, consumer protection, and licensure and professional
ethics of New Jerseys working professionals.
22. Defendant Milagros Collazo is Executive Director of the New Jersey Board of
Marriage and Family Therapy Examiners, which is responsible for regulating the practice of
marriage and family therapy and taking action against the unprofessional, improper,
unauthorized, or unqualified practice of marriage and family therapy.
23. Defendant J. Michael Walker is Executive Director of the New Jersey Board of
Psychological Examiners, which is responsible for licensing and regulating psychologists.
24. Defendant Paul Jordan is President of the New Jersey State Board of Medical
Examiners, which is responsible for licensing medical professionals, adopting regulations,
determining standards of practice, investigating allegations of physician misconduct, and
disciplining those who do not adhere to requirements, including psychiatrists.
GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
25. Following the New Jersey Legislatures passage of A3371, Defendant Governor
Christie signed A3371 on Monday, August 19, 2013, which amended Title 45 of the Revised
Statutes of New Jersey, and the law went into effect immediately. A3371 is attached hereto as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
26. Section 2(a) of A3371 states:

A person who is licensed to provide professional counseling under Title 45 of
the Revised Statutes, including, but not limited to, a psychiatrist, licensed
practicing psychologist, certified social worker, licensed clinical social worker,
licensed social worker, licensed marriage and family therapist, certified
psychoanalyst, or a person who performs counseling as part of the persons
professional training for any of these professions, shall not engage in sexual
orientation change efforts with a person under 18 years of age.

27. Section 2(b) of A3371 states:
[S]exual orientation change efforts means the practice of seeking to change a
persons sexual orientation, including, but not limited to, efforts to change
behaviors, gender identity, or gender expressions, or to reduce or eliminate sexual
or romantic attractions or feelings toward a person of the same gender; except that
sexual orientation change efforts shall not include counseling for a person seeking
to transition from one gender to another, or counseling that:

(1) provides acceptance, support, and understanding of a person or facilitates a
persons coping, social support, and identity exploration and development,
including sexual orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or address unlawful
conduct or unsafe sexual practices; and

(2) does not seek to change sexual orientation.

28. Section 3 of A3371 states that [t]his act shall take effect immediately.

29. General Principle E of the American Psychological Associations Ethical Principles
of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (APA Code) includes the following: Psychologists
respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to privacy,
confidentiality, and self-determination. (emphasis added.)
30. A3371 directly interferes with Plaintiffs clients right to self-determination, and the
right of their parents to determine and direct the upbringing and education of their minor
children, including the well-being of their spiritual needs.
31. Section 3.04 of the APA Code, Avoiding Harm, further states: Psychologists take
reasonable steps to avoid harming their clients/patients . . . and to minimize harm where it is
foreseeable and unavoidable.

32. Because the APA Code already prohibits harming patients, A3371 is unnecessary and
evidences an attempt to suppress the viewpoints of those who seek, who offer, or who refer to
someone licensed to provide SOCE or other spiritual or value-based counseling.
33. Section 1(a) of the American Psychiatric Association Guidelines for Ethical
Treatment (APA Guidelines) states: A psychiatrist shall not withhold information that the
patient needs or reasonably could use to make informed treatment decisions, including options
for treatment not provided by the psychiatrist.
34. A3371 mandates psychiatrists to violate Section 1(a) of the APA Guidelines by
forcing them to withhold information that a patient reasonably could use to make informed
treatment decisions.
35. By mandating that SOCE counseling options not be discussed or engaged in by
licensed psychiatrists, or even make referrals to others who provide SOCE counseling, clients
will not be able to make informed decisions, and the psychiatrists will be violating the ethical
code by imposing their own views and value judgments upon their clients.
36. Section 1(c) of the APA Guidelines states: A psychiatrist shall strive to provide
beneficial treatment that shall not be limited to minimum criteria of medical necessity.
37. A3371 mandates that licensed psychiatrists violate Section 1(c) of the APA
Guidelines by prohibiting them from providing beneficial SOCE counseling to those clients who
willingly consent to and desire such counseling to alleviate their unwanted same-sex sexual
attractions, behaviors, or identity.
38. Opinion 10.01(2) of the American Medical Association Code of Ethics (AMA Code)
states: The patient has the right to make decisions regarding the health care that is

recommended by his or her physician. Accordingly, patients may accept or refuse any
recommended medical treatment. (emphasis added).
39. A3371 requires that medical professionals violate this provision of the code of ethics
by prohibiting them from allowing patients to make any decision regarding the availability and
benefits of SOCE counseling by a licensed professional.
40. A3371 prohibits patients from being able to accept or reject SOCE counseling from a
licensed professional, even though the fundamental elements of the patient-physician
relationship require that the patient be provided with the full range of available counseling
options.
41. Opinion 10.016 of the AMA Code states: Medical decision-making for pediatric
patients should be based on the childs best interest, which is determined by weighing many
factors, including effectiveness of appropriate medical therapies, the patients psychological and
emotional welfare, and the family situation. When there is legitimate inability to reach consensus
about what is in the best interest of the child, the wishes of the parents should generally receive
preference.
42. A3371 forces physicians to violate this Opinion by removing certain counseling
options from the wishes of the parents and their minor children.
43. A3371 prohibits parents from even having the option to consider whether SOCE
treatment from a licensed professional is in the best interest of their child.
44. Section A.2.d of the American Counselors Association Code of Ethics (ACA Code)
states:
When counseling minors or persons unable to give voluntary consent, counselors
seek the assent of clients to services, and include them in decision-making as
appropriate. Counselors recognize the need to balance the ethical rights of clients
to make choices, their capacity to give consent or assent to receive services, and

parental or familial legal rights and responsibilities to protect those clients and
make decisions on their behalf.

45. Section B.5.b of the ACA Code states: Counselors are sensitive to the cultural
diversity of families and respect the inherent rights and responsibilities of parents/guardians over
the welfare of their children.
46. A3371 forces licensed counselors to violate Sections A.2.d and B.5.b of the ACA
Code by prohibiting them from respecting the rights of the parents/guardians to make the
decisions concerning the welfare of their child and minors from self-determination, at least
insofar as it entail the choice of a licensed professional counselor.
47. Section A.4.a of the ACA Code states: Counselors act to avoid harming their clients,
trainees, and research participation and to minimize or to remedy unavoidable or unanticipated
harm.
48. A3371 is unnecessary to prevent licensed counselors from harming their minor clients
because it is already prohibited.
49. Indeed, the prohibition on SOCE counseling makes it impossible for licensed mental
health providers and counselors to follow the ACA Codes directive to avoid harming their
clients when minor clients who desire the now-prohibited SOCE counseling from a licensed
professional are unable to determine their own course of counseling that aligns with their
religious, spiritual, and moral values.
50. Principles 1 and 1.2 of the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists
Code of Ethics (AAMFT Code) provide that all licensed Marriage and Family Therapists shall
advance the welfare of families and individuals and shall obtain informed consent from their
clients, which generally requires that the client has been adequately informed of significant
information concerning treatment processes and procedures.

51. A3371 arguably prohibits Licensed Marriage and Family Therapists from informing
their minor clients about an entire course of treatmentSOCE counseling from a licensed
professionalthat might benefit them and help them achieves their goals of eliminating or
reducing their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity.
52. Principle 1.8 of the AAMFT Code provides that licensed marriage and family
therapists respect the rights of clients to make decisions.
53. A3371 will prohibit New Jersey Licensed Marriage and Family Therapists from
respecting the rights of clients to make the decisions because the State has already made the
decision for every client that may seek counseling from a licensed professional on the issue of
sexual orientationi.e., no one under the age of eighteen can receive such SOCE counseling.
54. Because the State has made the decision for the client, Plaintiffs are hopelessly
conflicted between compliance with A3371 and compliance with Principle 1.8 of the AAMFT
Code and other relevant provisions of the code.
55. Section 1.01 of Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW
Code) states that it is a social workers primary responsibility to promote the well-being of their
clients.
56. A3371 purports to advance the compelling interest of protecting children, but it is
unnecessary as social workers must already act to promote their clients best interest.
57. Section 1.02 of the NASW Code provides that the clients shall have the right to self-
determination and that a social worker should only seek to assist the client in achieving his or her
goals and objectives for the counseling.
58. A3371 prohibits licensed New Jersey social workers from respecting the rights of the
client to self-determination by imposing the States determination on the course of their

counseling and mandating that only efforts that seek to affirm same-sex attractions, behaviors,
and identity are permissible in a licensed counselors office, even if this collides with the clients
religious, spiritual, and moral values.
59. Section 1.03 of the NASW Code provides that social workers must provide sufficient
information for the client to make an informed decision about his or her course of care and
specifically states that such informed consent must include a discussion of reasonable
alternatives.
60. A3371 prohibits any efforts by a licensed professional that seek to eliminate or reduce
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, so it prohibits the licensed social worker from
providing information to clients about the reasonable alternative available to those clients who
desire to change and could benefit from SOCE counseling.
61. Because A3371 requires licensed social workers to either violate the existing
provisions of the NASW Code or violate A3371, licensed social workers in New Jersey are
hopelessly condemned to discipline for ethical violations regardless of what they do.
62. In the professional opinion of Plaintiffs, cutting off SOCE counseling from licensed
professionals and information to minors that might reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex
sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity, or to otherwise address the conflicts between their
same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity and their religious, spiritual, and moral values
is harmful to minors, their parents/guardians, and to licensed counselors who seek to honor the
self-determination of their clients and who seek to provide spiritual counseling to those who seek
it.
Dr. Tara King

63. Dr. Tara King, a New Jersey resident, earned a Bachelors Degree in Counseling from
the University of Sioux Falls in 1987, a Masters Degree in Christian Counseling from Liberty
University in 1993, and a Doctor of Education Degree from Nova Southeastern University in
2000. Dr. Kings declaration in support of Plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order
and preliminary injunction, filed simultaneously with this Complaint is hereby incorporated by
reference.
64. Dr. King became certified as a Licensed Professional Counselor in 1999. She is also a
specialist in substance abuse counseling, and is a certified Substance Awareness Coordinator and
Licensed Clinical Alcohol and Drug Counselor.
65. Dr. King has 23 years of experience in the counseling field, which includes extensive
experience helping minors with both their educational and mental health counseling needs.
66. Dr. King served as a special education teacher and Administrator of Schools for
several years. This experience gave her unique insight and an ability to help minors in a variety
of situations, including mental health counseling, and it allows her to understand practical
approaches to helping those minors with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
67. In 2000, Dr. King founded the King of Hearts Counseling Center (King of Hearts)
in Brick, New Jersey, which is a Christian counseling center that focuses on counseling from a
Biblical perspective.
68. The mission of King of Hearts is to provide holistic health, addressing the emotional,
physical, mental, social, and spiritual elements of living and also to integrate the clients
sincerely held religious beliefs into the counseling relationship.
69. King of Hearts has two other licensed mental health professionals who, along with the
Director Dr. King, provide counseling on a number of issues, including post traumatic stress

disorder, depression, anxiety, mental difficulties, substance abuse, grief, anger management,
eating disorders, co-dependency, sex/love/relationship addictions, and SOCE, which King of
Hearts offers to both adults and minors.
70. Dr. King is a former lesbian who received SOCE counseling, and her life is living
proof that SOCE counseling can and does work for some individuals who struggle with
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and seek to reduce or eliminate them.
71. Dr. King engages in SOCE counseling with those clients who desire to do so because
her professional opinion and personal experiences inform her that SOCE counseling is an
effective method to assist people who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity and who desire to conform their attractions, behaviors, and identity to their sincerely
held religious beliefs.
72. Dr. King was sexually abused when she was a child and experienced tremendous
trauma from that abuse and from the dysfunctional family in which she was raised.
73. Dr. Kings opinion and experience inform her that such abuse and trauma were the
primary causes of her later developing sexual attractions toward other women, and at 16 she was
already involved in a same-sex relationship.
74. Even during that relationship and despite her same-sex sexual attractions, Dr. King
did not ever consider herself to be a homosexual, even though that is what many others tried to
tell her she was.
75. When she was 19, Dr. King began mental health counseling to deal with some other
mental health issues that resulted from her dysfunctional and traumatic childhood.
76. During that counseling relationship, her mental health counselor constantly told her
that she was a lesbian, that she was born a lesbian, that she would always be a lesbian, and that

she should just accept and embrace herself as a lesbian because there was nothing she could ever
do about it.
77. From ages 19-24, Dr. King continued to engage in same-sex relationships as though
she were a lesbian.
78. During that entire period, she simply did not understand her same-sex attractions but
continued to act on them because no one had ever mentioned that change might be possible and
that she did not have to continue a homosexual lifestyle if she did not want to do so.
79. Dr. Kings therapist and many others continued to tell her that she was always going
to be a lesbian, but after hearing about SOCE from her then lover, of all people, she knew change
was possible and wanted to see if she could succeed in changing.
80. Dr. King attended a ministry called Harvest USA, which is a Christian organization
that seeks to use the truth of Scripture to help individuals who struggle with unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity, and also help individuals who struggle with other sexual issues
such as pornography addictions or other sexual addictions.
81. It was at this ministry that Dr. King began to realize that she could change her
unwanted same-sex attractions and behavior.
82. Dr. King also began reading Steps Out of Homosexuality by Frank Worthen, who was
also a former homosexual who had successfully changed.
83. While reading that book, Dr. King began to speak with her girlfriend about it and
discussed that she wanted to leave the homosexual lifestyle, which she now knew was possible.
84. It was during one of those conversations with her former girlfriend that Dr. King
believed she could change and her Christian faith was a big part of her decision to change.

85. That day, Dr. King broke up with her girlfriend and made the decision that she was
going to change.
86. For five summers, Dr. King attended programs of Exodus International, which was an
organization helping homosexuals to change, and she also frequently attended Worthy Creations,
which is another group in Florida for former homosexuals.
87. Dr. King successfully left the homosexual lifestyle 23 years ago and has experienced
the change and reform that her Christian faith has brought into her life.
88. Because of her success, Dr. King knows that change is possible for other people with
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identities, and her change is the reason she wanted
to use her skills in education and training to begin to help others come to the realization that
change is possible for those struggling as she had struggled.
89. Dr. King founded King of Hearts to establish a place where she could assist people
with many different mental health issues, including individuals who struggle with unwanted
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identities.
90. Homosexuals frequently suffer from multiple mental health issues, and Dr. King, like
most other mental health professionals, has had homosexual clients seeking help for depression,
anxiety, distress, or other issues who never discussed sexual orientation or expressed a desire to
change, so she counseled them on the issues they choose to discuss with her.
91. Dr. Kings approach to counseling is inherently and properly a client centered
approach that professional ethics mandate and that is based solely on the clients goals and
objectives.

92. Because it is unethical for her to impose any kind of ideology or framework on her
clients, Dr. King does not even raise SOCE discussions unless a client wants to engage in such
counseling.
93. Because Dr. King testified before the legislature on A3371, one of her existing
homosexual clients approached her to discuss why Dr. King had never informed her that SOCE
counseling was available and that change was possible if the client wanted to reduce or eliminate
her unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity.
94. Dr. King informed this client that she would have been happy to engage in SOCE
counseling with the client, but that the client had never raised the issue in counseling and that Dr.
King cannot ethically impose a course of counseling on a client who otherwise does not present
with the goal of reducing or eliminating unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity.
95. Dr. King respects the desires and directives of all of her clients, including those who
are minors. She does not impose her own ideology or thinking on the client, but follows her
ethical duty to let the client direct the goals and desires of the counseling relationship.
96. Dr. King does not engage in SOCE counseling unless the client desires that
counseling and provides informed consent to begin such counseling.
97. Dr. Kings form of SOCE is simply talk therapy, and it is not different than any other
form of modern mental health counseling.
98. Dr. King testified before the legislature that the parade of horribles derived from
aversion techniques, such as electroshock treatments, the viewing of pornography, nausea-
inducing drugs, etc., are all methods of counseling that have not been used by any ethical and
licensed mental health professional in decades, and she believes mental health professionals who
engage in such practices should have their licenses revoked.

99. Dr. Kings SOCE counseling consists of the traditional psychodynamic process of
looking for root causes, childhood issues, developmental factors, and other things that cause a
person to present with all types of physical, mental, emotional, and psychological issues that
cause distress for the client.
100. Dr. Kings SOCE counseling is insight oriented, just like every other form of modern
mental health counseling, and she advocated that it should not be banned merely because some
people disagree with the fact that change is possible.
101. The only difference between Dr. Kings form of counseling and the counseling
provided by mental health professionals like her former therapist (who insisted she was and
always would be a lesbian) is that Dr. King believes that change is possible for those who wish
to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
102. Many of Dr. Kings clients seeking SOCE counseling claim that their unwanted
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity can be traced to abuse, trauma, neglect, and
unfulfilled gender identity needs, and many of those clients seeking SOCE counseling were
sexually molested by a member of the same sex.
103. Dr. King was a victim of sexual abuse and trauma as a child, and in her opinion it was
one of the root causes of her past unwanted same-sex attractions and behavior.
104. Dr. King acknowledges and stated in her testimony before the legislature that current
science does not support the notion that people are born gay.
105. The proposition that one is born gay and that same-sex attractions cannot be changed
is unsupported by science or reality as Dr. King knows that change is possible for those who
desire to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.

106. Dr. King has close friends who are also living proof that change is possible for those
who seek to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, and
that SOCE counseling can be an effective method by which to achieve such a desired result.
107. Many of Dr. Kings clients, both adult and minor, are Christians and request Christian
counseling as part of the SOCE counseling that she provides.
108. Most of Dr. Kings clients specifically choose King of Hearts because of its mission
to provide Christian counseling from a Biblical perspective and to incorporate the clients
sincerely held religious beliefs into the counseling relationship.
109. Many of Dr. Kings clients who seek SOCE counseling report varying degrees of
change from homosexuality to heterosexuality, and she has had clients report that SOCE
counseling helped them understand the root causes of their unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, and identity and why it was causing them so much stress.
110. Dr. King has been able to successfully counsel minor clients desiring to remediate
their unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, and identity, and her SOCE counseling has helped
many of these minor clients reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions and
behaviors, alleviate their mental anguish and anxiety caused by their unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, and identity, and increase security in their gender identity.
111. A3371 will prohibit Dr. King from continuing to provide the type of counseling that
her clients desire and from which they can benefit tremendously.
112. A3371 prohibits Dr. King from sharing valuable personal life experiences with her
clients and from helping them to see how change is possible in their own lives.
113. A3371 will prohibit Dr. King from speaking about the potential benefits of SOCE
counseling and how she successfully alleviated her unwanted same-sex attractions and behavior.

114. Dr. King and her clients are suffering and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a
result of A3371, and she will be forced to violate the codes of ethics no matter what she does
with respect to clients seeking counseling from a licensed professional to reduce or resolve same-
sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity.
115. By prohibiting minors from receiving SOCE counseling from licensed professionals,
A3371 has made a portion of Dr. Kings practice illegal and unethical.
116. A3371 also forces Dr. King to violate the requirements of her ethical code because if
she complies with A3371, she will violate the code of ethics, and if she does not comply and
engages in SOCE counseling or refers to a licensed professional who does, she violates A3371.
In addition, A3371 forces Dr. King to refer a client seeking SOCE to an unlicensed counselor if
she refers at all), thereby subjecting her to further ethical violations and possibly legal action,
because unlicensed counselors are less likely to use the care and professionalism employed by
licensed professionals.
117. In addition to compromising her practice, A3371 infringes on Dr. Kings
constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech, forcing her to express only one viewpoint
on the subject of same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, and identity, and on SOCE counseling.
118. A3371 will also substantially interfere with Dr. Kings counselor-patient relationship
by prohibiting her from counseling consenting minor patients according to their sincerely held
religious beliefs.
Dr. Ronald Newman
119. Dr. Ronald Newman is a licensed psychologist in New Jersey.
120. Dr. Newman received his Doctor of Philosophy degree in Psychoeducational
Processes in 1990, his Master of Arts degree in Counseling Psychology from Trinity Evangelical

Divinity School in 1980, a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology from West Virginia
University in 1976, and an Associate of Arts degree in Theology from Christ for the Nations
Institute in 1978. Dr. Newmans declaration in support of Plaintiffs motion for a temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction, filed simultaneously with this Complaint is hereby
incorporated by reference.
121. Dr. Newmans doctoral dissertation focused on the interaction between religiosity and
stress, which makes him uniquely suited to helping clients incorporate their sincerely held
religious beliefs into the counseling relationship.
122. Dr. Newman has 32 years of experience as a mental health professional, has been a
Licensed Psychologist in New Jersey since 1995, and is a Board Certified Professional Christian
Counselor through the American Association of Christian Counselors.
123. In 1998, Dr. Newman founded the Christian Counseling Consortium of South Jersey
(CCC), which is a consortium of 50 active licensed and unlicensed mental health professionals,
counselors, and pastors committed to engaging in counseling from a Christian perspective
founded on the inherent truths of Scripture and with approximately 200 people affiliated with the
CCC in some manner.
124. Dr. Newman founded the CCC to provide a forum for mental health professionals and
counselors to come together to focus on and discuss contemporary issues of concern and to
provide mutual support to Christian mental health professionals, church counselors, and pastors.
125. Dr. Newman and the CCC provide Christ-centered training for licensed mental health
professionals and others involved in Christian counseling, mental health, and spiritual formation.

126. The CCCs mission is to encourage and support one another in their service to Jesus
Christ through the ministry and vocation of Christian mental health counseling, as well as to
cooperate in serving the body of Christ and the community at large.
127. Dr. Newman derived the mission of the CCC from the Bible in the Book of Galatians
chapter 6, verses 9-10, which states, let us not grow weary in well doing; for in due season we
shall reap, if we faint not. As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men,
especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
128. Dr. Newman founded the CCC to carry this Scriptural command into the field of
mental health counseling and seeks to accomplish this purpose through prayer, fellowship,
sharing resources, mutual case-consultations, jointly sponsoring education and training events,
and other creative resources to help the needs of the community and the individuals who seek
mental health counseling consistent with their sincerely held religious beliefs.
129. Dr. Newmans vision for the CCC is that it will be an organization focused on helping
people in need of mental health counseling to conform their lives to their sincerely held religious
beliefs, which also includes those adults and minors who struggle with unwanted same-sex
130. Dr. Newman is a member of the American Psychological Association (APA), the
New Jersey Psychological Association, the Christian Association for Psychological Studies, the
National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), and the
American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC).
131. Dr. Newman is also the Program Director of the International School of Christian
Counseling in Lima, Peru, where he has the primary responsibility for developing the program
which is designed to train Christian counselors in Latin America, and he has traveled to various

South American countries 19 times in 20 years to help teach pastors and counselors about
effective mental health counseling methods.
132. Dr. Newmans practice is located in two offices at Hammonton, New Jersey and
Linwood, New Jersey, and most of his clients seek his counsel because of his Christian identity
and their trust that their Christian values and beliefs will be respected in counseling.
133. Dr. Newman currently sees approximately 35- 40 clients per week, and he counsels
individuals and families concerning stress, panic and anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress
disorder, grief, couples/marital counseling, and many other mental health issues that cause
people distress, including individuals and minors who struggle with unwanted same-sex
134. For those clients who seek counseling from a Christian perspective and desire to
conform their counseling goals to their sincerely held religious beliefs, Dr. Newman focuses on
Biblical integration in the counseling relationships he forms with those clients.
135. Part of Dr. Newmans practice involves SOCE counseling, sometimes with minors
who seek such counseling because of their desire to conform their attractions, behavior, and
identity to their sincerely held religious beliefs, and he currently has clients who are struggling
with issues that would fall under the prohibitions outlined in A3371.
136. Dr. Newman currently has a minor client who has developed confusion about the
clients sexual orientation after engaging in some experimental behavior with a member of the
same sex and has raised the issue with Dr. Newman about whether this makes the client a
homosexual, which is a situation where A3371 would mandate only one type of counseling.

137. Many of Dr. Newmans clients seeking SOCE counseling to reduce or eliminate their
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity do so because their religious beliefs inform
them that change is possible and that SOCE counseling can help them.
138. Dr. Newmans first step in the counseling relationship, including those involving
minors with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity, is to discover what the
patient and patients parents are hoping to achieve with the counseling and to establish the
clients particular goals for the counseling.
139. Dr. Newmans counseling is client centered, and he ensures that the clients goals and
objectives are always respected and that they control the counseling relationship.
140. When minor clients do not want to engage in SOCE counseling, his counseling
relationship generally focuses on helping the parents understand the childs thinking, providing
psychoeducation about homosexuality among youth, and working within the parents religious
beliefs to help them love and support their child.
141. When both the minor and the parents desire to engage in SOCE counseling, Dr.
Newman explains the nature of the relationship and the types of discussions that are involved in
SOCE counseling.
142. Dr. Newman also explains to the client that if his or her objectives or goals change
during the course of the counseling or if his or her same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity are
no longer unwanted, then the client should immediately inform him, as the direction and focus of
the counseling will need to change.
143. Dr. Newman explains to his clients that SOCE counseling has been effective for some
people with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, but that the counseling can
sometimes invoke stress or anxiety about past events or root causes.

144. Some of the individuals who decided to stop SOCE counseling with Dr. Newman still
benefitted from the counseling sessions despite deciding that their same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity were not unwanted.
145. Dr. Newman and his patients are suffering and, absent injunctive relief, will continue
to suffer irreparable harm as a result of A3371.
146. By prohibiting minors from receiving SOCE counseling, A3371 has made a portion
of Dr. Newmans practice illegal and unethical.
147. A3371 will prevent Dr. Newmans patients from continuing to progress in their
individually determined course of counseling, and from continuing to receive counseling in
accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs.
148. A3371 also leaves Dr. Newman on an irresolvable collision course with the
requirements APA Code because if he complies with A3371, he will violate the code of ethics,
and if he does not comply and engages in SOCE counseling or refers to a licensed professional
who does (and perhaps even if he refers to an unlicensed counselor), he violates A3371.
NARTH
149. NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who
struggle with unwanted homosexuality and same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. David
Prudens declaration on behalf of NARTH in support of Plaintiffs motion for a temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction, filed simultaneously with this Complaint is hereby
incorporated by reference.
150. As an organization, NARTH disseminates educational information, conducts and
collects scientific research, promotes effective therapeutic treatment, and provides international
referrals to those who seek its assistance.

151. NARTH is engaged in extensive research concerning individuals who have
successfully reduced or eliminated their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity or
sincerely desire to do so and the psychological factors that are typically associated with a
homosexual lifestyle.
152. NARTH offers scholarly publications and educational information to the general
public.
153. NARTH provides various presentations across the country hosted by mental health
professionals who specialize in what is referred to in A3371 as SOCE counseling.
154. NARTH advocates for an open discussion of all viewpoints concerning SOCE
counseling and its potential benefits or harms to patients.
155. NARTH supports the rights of individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity, including minors, to receive effective psychological care, including SOCE
counseling, and the rights of professionals to offer that care.
156. NARTH does not advocate for or support imposing its ideology on any patient and
seeks to offer the course of treatment desired by the patient in accordance with the patients
fundamental right to self-determination.
157. A3371 prohibits licensed mental health providers from using SOCE, defined as the
practice of seeking to change an individuals sexual orientation.
158. NARTHs dissemination of educational information regarding homosexuality and
promotion of effective therapeutic treatment for homosexuals appears to fall within the category
of conduct A3371 prohibits.
159. Disseminating information and providing referrals will place its licensed professional
members at risk of being found in violation of their respective professional codes of conduct.

160. NARTH members in and outside of New Jersey currently have clients who receive
SOCE treatment in and outside of New Jersey.
161. Some of the clients of NARTH members are minors who will lose all ability to
continue receiving the SOCE counseling from licensed professionals that they desire.
162. These minor clients will suffer regression in their course of treatment as a result of
their licensed counselor being prohibited from continuing to offer it.
163. Licensed NARTH members will continue to have minor clients approach them
concerning a desire to reduce or eliminate unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
164. Some NARTH members report that five to ten percent of their practice involve SOCE
counseling and that nearly half of those seeking such counseling are minors.
165. A3371 has caused and will continue to cause NARTH and its members to suffer
irreparable injury.
166. Banning SOCE will cause immediate and irreparable harm to minors seeking
counseling from licensed professionals, their parents/guardians, and to Plaintiffs and licensed
counselors when clients seek such counseling and they are forbidden to offer it or to refer clients
to professionals who do.
167. A3371 also forces NARTHs members to violate the requirements the ethical codes
under which they are licensed because if they comply with A3371, they will violate their
respective codes of ethics, and if they do not comply and engage in SOCE counseling or refer to
someone who does, they will violate A3371.
AACC
168. AACC is an international nonprofit professional scientific organization with 50,000
members representing the full spectrum of mental health professionals. Dr. Scalises declaration

on behalf of AACC in support of Plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order and
preliminary injunction filed , filed simultaneously with this Complaint is hereby incorporated by
reference.
169. AACCs mission is to equip its members with distinctively Christian and clinically
sound psycho-educational resources and services that address the whole person and which help
individuals move toward personal wholeness, interpersonal competence, mental stability, and
spiritual maturity.
170. AACC seeks to encourage and support Christian counseling worldwide; disseminate
information, educational resources, and counseling aids; stimulate interaction and mutual growth
between mental health practitioners; advocate for the balanced integration of counseling and
psychological principles with theology; inspire and offer the highest levels of training and
continuing education; and promote ethical practice, integrity, sound research, and excellence in
the delivery of professional and pastoral services.
171. AACCs members adhere to the time-honored and foundational ethical value of client
self-determination. AACCs members regard self-determination as a cornerstone principle in the
treatment of mental health disorders as found in the language of the ethical codes of notable
professional member organizations such as the American Psychological Association (APA), the
American Counseling Association (ACA), and the American Association of Marriage and
Family Therapists (AAMFT).
172. AACCs members follow the ethic construct that every client seeking mental health
services has the inherent right to participate in treatment that is in alignment with his/her
religious beliefs and faith-based values, and furthermore, to have this right vigorously protected.

This ethical construct is severely undermined when members are prohibited from utilizing or
even discussing particular types of therapeutic treatment.
173. AACCs members adhere to the construct that when a clients faith values may be in
conflict with other cultural values, such as those expressed by the Legislature in A3371, that
ultimately the clientand in the case of a minor, his/her parent or legal guardianhas the moral
and ethical right to participate in and determine the appropriate course of care, including
alignment with his/her relevant religious beliefs.
174. A3371 unfairly and unnecessarily discriminates against the religious liberties of
licensed AACCs members and their clients and represents an intrusive and potentially damaging
dynamic that undermines the delivery of care and the therapeutic relationship.
175. All Plaintiffs are faced with immediate and irreparable harm because A3371 went
into effect immediately when it was signed into law.
176. The parents of Plaintiffs clients face immediate and irreparable harm to their rights
as parents to provide for the well-being of their children. They will be forced to receive only one
viewpoint on same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity even though that viewpoint conflicts
with their religious and moral values.
177. Plaintiffs clients face immediate and irreparable harm because effective immediately,
they will no longer be able to determine their own destiny because that will be determined by the
State, and they will suffer irreparable harm when the licensed counseling they seek and freely
chose will be eliminated by A3371. They will be forced to receive only one viewpoint on same-
sex attractions, behaviors, or identity even though that viewpoint conflicts with their religious
and moral values, or to seek counseling from an unlicensed and largely unregulated practitioners
with whom they have no previous therapeutic alliance.

178. Dr. King, Dr. Newman, NARTH, AACC, and their members, face immediate and
irreparable harm because effective immediately, they will be forced to either violate their
respective ethical codes by refusing to honor the right of their clients to self-determination and
having to impose a state-mandated ideology on them despite their clients objections to the
contrary, and if they do honor their clients self-determination to seek spiritual and values-based
counseling to reduce or eliminate their same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, they will
violate A3371. Their licenses are on the line and their right to freedom of speech will be
eliminated because they will be forced to present only one viewpoint on same-sex attractions,
behavior, or identity.
179. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to correct the continuing deprivations of
their most cherished liberties and rights under the United States Constitution, and the New Jersey
Constitution.
180. Plaintiffs immediately need immediate injunctive and declaratory relief to prevent
these deprivations of their constitutional rights.
COUNT I A3371 VIOLATES PLAINTIFFS RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH
UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
181. Plaintiffs reiterate and adopt each and every allegation in the preceding paragraphs
numbered 1 through 180.
182. The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as
applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits Defendants from abridging
Plaintiffs freedom of speech.
183. A3371, on its face and as applied, is an unconstitutional prior restraint on Plaintiffs
speech.

184. A3371, on its face and as applied, discriminates against Plaintiffs speech on the basis
of the content of the message they offer or that Plaintiffs clients seek to receive.
185. A3371s prohibition, on its face and as applied, on licensed mental health
professionals from offering or referring clients to someone who offers SOCE counseling as a part
of their licensed counseling represents unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.
186. A3371, on its face and as applied, authorizes only one viewpoint on SOCE and
unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, and identity by forcing the Counselor Plaintiffs
and the licensed members of the Plaintiff Associations to present only one viewpoint on the
otherwise permissible subject matter of same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and forces the
Plaintiffs clients and their parents to receive only one viewpoint on this otherwise permissible
subject matter.
187. Defendants lack a compelling, legitimate, or other significant governmental interest to
justify A3371s infringement of the right to free speech.
188. A3371, on its face and as applied, is not the least restrictive means to accomplish any
permissible government purpose sought to be served by the law.
189. Informed consent provisions outlining the required disclosure prior to engaging in
SOCE counseling with a minor would have been far less restrictive of Plaintiffs speech, and
mental health counseling organizations have written letters in the past with similar legislation
urging that the legislature adopt informed consent provisions. A copy of the California mental
health organizations letter to the California legislature concerning legislation virtually identical
to A3371 is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein.
190. A3371 does not leave open ample alternative channels of communication for
Plaintiffs.

191. A3371, on its face and as applied, is irrational and unreasonable and imposes
unjustifiable and unreasonable restrictions on constitutionally protected speech.
192. A3371, on its face and as applied, unconstitutionally chills and abridges the right of
Plaintiffs to freely communicate information pertaining to unwanted same-sex sexual attractions,
behaviors, or identity.
Plaintiffs clients to freely receive information pertaining to unwanted same-sex sexual
194. A3371s prohibition on licensed mental health counselors offering SOCE counseling
that could change, reduce, or otherwise address a minor clients unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity, which would include a referral to someone who offers SOCE counseling,
on its face and as applied, abridges Plaintiffs right offer and Plaintiffs clients right to receive
information.
195. By declaring SOCE counseling unprofessional conduct and subjecting licensed
mental health counselors who engage in SOCE counseling to professional discipline, including
potential license suspension or revocation, A3371, on its face and as applied, represents an
unconstitutional condition on the practice of licensed mental health professionals and on their
right to free speech.
196. A3371 vests unbridled discretion in government officials, including Defendants, to
grant or deny and to apply or not apply A3371 in a manner to restrict free speech and subjects
Plaintiffs and the members of the Plaintiff Associations to ethical code violations.

197. A3371, on its face and as applied, is impermissibly vague as it requires licensed
professionals subject to its dictates and government officials tasked with enforcing it to guess at
its meaning and differ as to its application.
198. A3371, on its face and as applied, is under-inclusive by limiting the prohibition on
using SOCE counseling to minors.
199. A3371, on its face and as applied, is unconstitutionally overbroad as it chills and
abridges the free speech rights of all licensed mental health providers in the State of New Jersey
who use counseling techniques that have the potential help a minor reduce or eliminate his or her
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and does not leave open alternative
methods of communication.
200. On its face and as applied, A3371s violation of Plaintiffs rights of free speech has
caused, is causing, and will continue to cause Plaintiffs to suffer undue and actual hardship and
irreparable injury.
201. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to correct the continuing deprivation of
their most cherished constitutional liberties.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray for the relief against Defendants as hereinafter set
forth in their prayer for relief.
COUNT II A3371 VIOLATES PLAINTIFFS RIGHT TO LIBERTY OF SPEECH
UNDER ARTICLE I, 6 OF THE NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION.

203. Article I, 6 of the Constitution of the State of New Jersey states, Every person may
freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of
that right. No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.

204. Article I, 6 of the New Jersey Constitution provides greater protection to liberty of
speech than does the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
205. A3371, on its face and as applied, is an unconstitutional prior restraint on Plaintiffs
speech.
206. A3371, on its face and as applied, discriminates against Plaintiffs speech on the basis
of the content of the message they offer or Plaintiffs clients seek to receive.
207. A3371s prohibition, on its face and as applied, on licensed mental health counselors
from offering or referring clients to another licensed professional who offers SOCE counseling
as a part of their practice represents unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.
208. A3371, on its face and as applied, authorizes only one viewpoint on SOCE and
unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, and identity by forcing the licensed Counselor
Plaintiffs and the licensed members of the Plaintiff Associations to present only one viewpoint
on the otherwise permissible subject matter of same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and
forces the Plaintiffs clients and their parents to receive only one viewpoint on this otherwise
permissible subject matter.
209. Defendants lack a compelling, legitimate, or other significant governmental interest to
justify A3371s infringement of the right to free speech.
210. A3371, on its fact and as applied, is not the least restrictive means to accomplish any
permissible government purpose sought to be served by the law.
211. A3371 does not leave open ample alternative channels of communication for
Plaintiffs.
212. A3371, on its face and as applied, is irrational and unreasonable, and imposes
unjustifiable and unreasonable restrictions on constitutionally protected speech.

Plaintiffs to freely communicate information pertaining to unwanted same-sex sexual attractions,
behaviors, or identity.
Plaintiffs clients to freely receive information pertaining to unwanted same-sex sexual
215. A3371s prohibition on licensed mental health counselors offering SOCE counseling
that could change, reduce, or otherwise address a minor clients unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity, which would include any referral to someone who offers SOCE
counseling, on its face and as applied, abridges Plaintiffs right offer and Plaintiffs clients right
to receive information.
216. By declaring SOCE counseling unprofessional conduct and subjecting licensed
mental health counselors who engage in SOCE counseling to professional discipline, including
potential license suspension or revocation, A3371, on its face and as applied, represents an
unconstitutional condition on the practice of licensed mental health professionals and on their
right to free speech.
217. A3371 vests unbridled discretion in government officials, including Defendants, to
grant or deny and to apply or not apply A3371 in a manner to restrict free speech and subjects
Plaintiffs and the licensed members of the Plaintiff Associations to ethical code violations.
218. A3371, on its face and as applied, is impermissibly vague as it requires professionals
subject to its dictates and government officials tasked with its enforcement to guess at its
meaning and differ as to its application.

219. A3371, on its face and as applied, is under-inclusive by limiting the prohibition on
using SOCE counseling to minors.
220. A3371, on its face and as applied, is unconstitutionally overbroad as it chills and
abridges the free speech rights of all licensed mental health providers in the State of New Jersey
who use counseling techniques that have the potential help a minor reduce or eliminate his or her
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and does not leave open alternative
methods of communication.
221. On its face and as applied, A3371s violation of Plaintiffs rights of free speech has
caused, is causing, and will continue to cause Plaintiffs to suffer undue and actual hardship and
irreparable injury.


WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray for relief against Defendants as hereinafter set
COUNT III -- A3371 VIOLATES PLAINTIFFS CLIENTS FIRST AMENDMENT
RIGHT TO RECEIVE INFORMATION

224. The First Amendment, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, protects
an individuals freedom of speech, and the flipside of the right to freedom of speech is the right
225. To withstand constitutional scrutiny, restriction on fundamental right of Plaintiffs
clients to receive information must be supported by a compelling state interest and must be
narrowly tailored to meet that end.

226. The Plaintiffs clients have a sincerely held religious beliefs that shape their desire to
receive SOCE counseling and the information that Plaintiffs can provide on reducing or
eliminating unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity.
227. A3371 prevents Plaintiffs clients from receiving the SOCE counseling and deprives
them of the opportunity to even obtain the information about SOCE counseling from a licensed
mental health professional in New Jersey.
228. A3371 is not supported by a compelling state interest.
229. Even if A3371 were supported by a compelling state interest, it is not narrowly
tailored to achieve that purpose and therefore violates the fundamental rights of Plaintiffs clients
230. A3371s violation of the fundamental rights of Plaintiffs clients has caused, is
causing, and will continue to cause undue and actual hardship and irreparably injury.
231. Plaintiffs clients have no adequate remedy at law to correct the continuing
deprivation of their most cherished constitutional liberties.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for the relief against Defendants as hereinafter set forth in
their prayer for relief
COUNT IV A3371 VIOLATES PLAINTIFFS RIGHT TO FREE EXERCISE OF
RELIGION

233. The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,
as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits Defendants from abridging
Plaintiffs right to free exercise of religion.

234. Many of Plaintiffs clients and their parents/guardians have sincerely held religious
beliefs that same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity are wrong, and they seek to
resolve these conflicts between their religious beliefs and their attractions in favor of their
religious beliefs.
235. Plaintiffs and the members of the Plaintiff Associations also have sincerely held
religious beliefs to provide spiritual counsel and assistance to their clients who seek such counsel
in order to honor their clients right to self-determination and to freely exercise their own
sincerely held religious beliefs to counsel on the subject matter of same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity from a religious viewpoint that aligns with their religious beliefs and those
of their clients.
236. A3371, on its face and as applied, targets the Plaintiffs and their clients beliefs
regarding human nature, gender, ethics, morality, and SOCE counseling, which are informed by
the Bible and constitute central components of their sincerely held religious beliefs, and A3371
will cause them a direct and immediate conflict with their religious beliefs by prohibiting them
from offering, referring, and receiving counseling that is consistent with their religious beliefs.
237. A3371, on its face and as applied, has impermissibly burdened Plaintiffs and their
clients sincerely held religious beliefs and compels them to both change those religious beliefs
and to act in contradiction to them.
238. A3371s imposition, on its face and as applied, on Plaintiffs is neither neutral nor
generally applicable, but rather specifically and discriminatorily targets the religious speech,
beliefs, and viewpoint of those individuals who believe change is possible, and thus expressly on
its face and as applied constitutes a substantial burden on sincerely held religious beliefs that are
contrary to the state-approved viewpoint on same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity.

239. A3371, on its face and as applied, has unconstitutionally conditioned state licensing
on the Plaintiffs and the members of the Plaintiff Associations by requiring them to compromise
their clearly established right to the free exercise of religion and belief to obtain the States
license.
240. The State of New Jerseys alleged interest in protecting minors from the so-called
harm of SOCE counseling is unsubstantiated and does not constitute a compelling state interest.
241. No compelling state interest justifies the burdens Defendants impose upon Plaintiffs
and their clients rights to the free exercise of religion.
242. Even if A3371s provisions were supported by a compelling state interest, they are
not the least restrictive means to accomplish any permissible government purpose A3371 seeks
to serve.
243. On its face and as applied, A3371s violation of Plaintiffs and their clients rights to
free exercise of religion has caused, is causing, and will continue to cause Plaintiffs and their
clients to suffer undue and actual hardship and irreparable injury.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray for the relief against Defendants as hereinafter set
COUNT V A3371 VIOLATES PLAINTIFFS RIGHT TO FREE EXERCISE
AND ENJOYMENT OF RELIGION UNDER ARTICLE I, 3 and 5 OF THE
NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION

246. Article I, 3 of the New Jersey Constitution states, No person shall be denied the
inestimable privilege of worshipping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his
own conscience.
247. Article I, 5 of the New Jersey Constitution states, No person shall be denied the
enjoyment of any civil or military right, nor be discriminated against in the exercise of any civil
or military right, nor be segregated in the militia or in the public schools, because of religious
principles, race, color, ancestry or national origin.
248. Plaintiffs clients and their parents/guardians have sincerely held religious beliefs that
same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity are wrong, and they seek to resolve these
conflicts between their religious beliefs and their attractions in favor of their religious beliefs.
249. Plaintiffs and the members of the Plaintiff Associations also have sincerely held
religious beliefs to provide spiritual counsel and assistance to their clients who seek such counsel
in order to honor their clients right to self-determination and to freely exercise their own
sincerely held religious beliefs to counsel on the subject matter of same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity from a religious viewpoint that aligns with their religious beliefs and those
of their clients.
250. A3371, on its face and as applied, targets the Plaintiffs and their clients beliefs
regarding human nature, gender, ethics, morality, and SOCE counseling, which are informed by
the Bible and constitute central components of their sincerely held religious beliefs, and A3371
will cause them a direct and immediate conflict with their religious beliefs by prohibiting them
from offering, referring, and receiving counseling that is consistent with their religious beliefs.

251. A3371, on its face and as applied, has impermissibly burdened Plaintiffs and their
clients sincerely held religious beliefs and compels them to both change those religious beliefs
and to act in contradiction to them.
252. A3371s imposition, on its face and as applied, on Plaintiffs is neither neutral nor
generally applicable, but rather specifically and discriminatorily targets the religious speech,
beliefs, and viewpoint of those individuals who believe change is possible, and thus expressly on
its face and as applied constitutes a substantial burden on sincerely held religious beliefs that are
contrary to the state-approved viewpoint on same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity.
253. A3371, on its face and as applied, has unconstitutionally conditioned state licensing
on Plaintiffs and the members of the Plaintiff Associations by requiring them to compromise
their clearly established right to free exercise of religion and belief to obtain the States license.
254. The State of New Jerseys alleged interest in protecting minors from the so-called
harm of SOCE counseling is unsubstantiated and does not constitute a compelling state interest.
255. No compelling state interest justifies the burdens Defendants imposed upon Plaintiffs
and their clients rights to the free exercise of religion.
256. Even if A3371s provisions were supported by a compelling state interest, they are
not the least restrictive means to accomplish any permissible government purpose A3371 seeks
to serve.
257. On its face and as applied, A3371s violation of Plaintiffs and their clients rights to
free exercise of religion has caused, is causing, and will continue to cause Plaintiffs to suffer
undue and actual hardship and irreparable injury.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays for relief against Defendants as hereinafter set
COUNT VI A3371 VIOLATES THE PARENTAL RIGHTS OF PLAINTIFFS
CLIENTS UNDER THE FIRST AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

260. The First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution protect the
fundamental rights of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children according
to their sincerely held religious beliefs.
261. To withstand constitutional scrutiny, restrictions on fundamental parental rights must
be supported by a compelling state interest and must be narrowly tailored to meet that end.
262. The parents of Plaintiffs clients desire that their minor children receive SOCE
counseling to assist them in conforming their sexual attractions, behaviors, and identity to their
sincerely held religious beliefs.
263. A3371 prevents the parents of Plaintiffs clients from seeking mental health
counseling for their minor childrens unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity that
conforms to their sincerely held religious beliefs.
264. A3371 is not supported by a compelling state interest.
265. Even if A3371 was supported by a compelling interest, it is not narrowly tailored to
achieve that purpose and therefore violates the fundamental parental rights of the parents of
Plaintiffs clients.
266. A3371s violation of the fundamental parental rights of the parents of Plaintiffs
clients has caused, is causing, and will continue to cause those parents to suffer undue and actual
hardship and irreparable injury.

267. The parents of Plaintiffs clients have no adequate remedy at law to correct the
continuing deprivation of their most cherished constitutional liberties.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray for relief against Defendants as hereinafter set
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief as follows:
A. That this Court issue a Preliminary Injunction enjoining Defendants, Defendants
officers, agents, employees, attorneys, and all other persons acting in active concert or
participation with them, from enforcing A3371 so that:
i. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to infringe Plaintiffs
constitutional and statutory rights in the counseling of their clients or from
offering a viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject matter;
ii. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to prohibit Plaintiffs from
engaging in SOCE counseling with those minor clients who seek such
treatment;
iii. Defendants will use A3371 to prohibit Plaintiffs clients and their parents from
seeking or receiving SOCE for unwanted same-sex sexual attractions,
behaviors, or identity; and
iv. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to punish Plaintiffs or their
clients for engaging, referring to, seeking, or receiving SOCE counseling.
B. That this Court issue a Permanent Injunction enjoining Defendants, Defendants
officers, agents, employees, attorneys, and all other persons acting in active concert or
participation with them, from enforcing A3371 so that:

i. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to infringe Plaintiffs
constitutional and statutory rights in the counseling of their clients or from
offering a viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject matter;
ii. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to prohibit Plaintiffs from
engaging in SOCE treatments with those minor clients who seek such
treatment;
iii. Defendants will use A3371 to prohibit Plaintiffs clients and their parents from
seeking or receiving SOCE for unwanted same-sex sexual attractions,
behaviors, or indentity; and
iv. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to punish Plaintiffs or their
clients for engaging, referring to, seeking, or receiving SOCE counseling.
C. That this Court render a Declaratory Judgment declaring A3371 and Defendants
actions in applying A3371 unconstitutional under the United States Constitution and New Jersey
Constitution, declaring:
i. Defendants violated Plaintiffs and their clients right to freedom of speech by
prohibiting them from providing, referring to, seeking, or receiving
information concerning SOCE counseling;
ii. Defendants violated Plaintiffs and their clients right to free exercise of
religion by prohibiting Plaintiffs from providing, referring to, seeking, or
receiving information concerning SOCE counseling in accordance with their
sincerely held religious beliefs;
iii. Defendants violated fundamental right of the Plaintiffs clients parents to
direct the upbringing and education of their children;

D. That this Court award Plaintiffs nominal damages for the violation of Plaintiffs
constitutional rights.
E. That this Court adjudge, decree, and declare the rights and other legal relations with
the subject matter here in controversy so that such declaration shall have the force and effect of
final judgment;
F. That this Court retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enforcing this
Courts order;
G. That this Court award Plaintiffs the reasonable costs and expenses of this action,
including attorneys fees, in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 1988.
H. That this Court grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and
just under the circumstances.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Demetrios Stratis
Demetrios Stratis
New Jersey Bar No. 022391991
Mathew D. Staver*
Stephen M. Crampton*
Daniel J. Schmid*
Liberty Counsel
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
P.O. Box 11108
Lynchburg, VA 24502
Tel. 434-592-7000
Fax: 434-592-7700
court@LC.org

* Application to appear Pro Hac Vice
pending

(Sponsorship Updated As Of: 6/7/2013)
ASSEMBLY, No. 3371

STATE OF NEW JERSEY
215th LEGISLATURE

INTRODUCED OCTOBER 15, 2012

Sponsored by:
Assemblyman TIMOTHY J. EUSTACE
District 38 (Bergen and Passaic)
Assemblyman HERB CONAWAY, JR.
District 7 (Burlington)
Assemblywoman HOLLY SCHEPISI
District 39 (Bergen and Passaic)
Assemblyman REED GUSCIORA
District 15 (Hunterdon and Mercer)
Assemblyman JOHN J. BURZICHELLI
District 3 (Cumberland, Gloucester and Salem)

Co-Sponsored by:
Assemblywomen Vainieri Huttle, Lampitt, Tucker, Assemblyman
Wisniewski, Assemblywomen Caride, Mosquera and Jasey

SYNOPSIS
Protects minors by prohibiting attempts to change sexual orientation.

CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
As introduced.

Case 3:13-cv-05038-FLW-LHG Document 1-2 Filed 08/22/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 49
A3371 EUSTACE, CONAWAY
2

AN ACT concerning the protection of minors from attempts to 1
change sexual orientation and supplementing Title 45 of the 2
Revised Statutes. 3
4
BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State 5
of New Jersey: 6
7
1. The Legislature finds and declares that: 8
a. Being lesbian, gay, or bisexual is not a disease, disorder, 9
illness, deficiency, or shortcoming. The major professional 10
associations of mental health practitioners and researchers in the 11
United States have recognized this fact for nearly 40 years; 12
b. The American Psychological Association convened a Task 13
Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation. 14
The task force conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed 15
journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts, and issued a 16
report in 2009. The task force concluded that sexual orientation 17
change efforts can pose critical health risks to lesbian, gay, and 18
bisexual people, including confusion, depression, guilt, 19
helplessness, hopelessness, shame, social withdrawal, suicidality, 20
substance abuse, stress, disappointment, self-blame, decreased self- 21
esteem and authenticity to others, increased self-hatred, hostility 22
and blame toward parents, feelings of anger and betrayal, loss of 23
friends and potential romantic partners, problems in sexual and 24
emotional intimacy, sexual dysfunction, high-risk sexual behaviors, 25
a feeling of being dehumanized and untrue to self, a loss of faith, 26
and a sense of having wasted time and resources; 27
c. The American Psychological Association issued a resolution 28
on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation 29
Distress and Change Efforts in 2009, which states: [T]he 30
[American Psychological Association] advises parents, guardians, 31
young people, and their families to avoid sexual orientation change 32
efforts that portray homosexuality as a mental illness or 33
developmental disorder and to seek psychotherapy, social support, 34
and educational services that provide accurate information on 35
sexual orientation and sexuality, increase family and school 36
support, and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth; 37
d. (1) The American Psychiatric Association published a 38
position statement in March of 2000 in which it stated: 39
Psychotherapeutic modalities to convert or repair homosexuality 40
are based on developmental theories whose scientific validity is 41
questionable. Furthermore, anecdotal reports of cures are 42
counterbalanced by anecdotal claims of psychological harm. In the 43
last four decades, reparative therapists have not produced any 44
rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. 45
Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric 46
Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from 47
attempts to change individuals sexual orientation, keeping in mind 48
the medical dictum to first, do no harm; 49
3

(2) The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including 1
depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior, since therapist 2
alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may 3
reinforce self-hatred already experienced by the patient. Many 4
patients who have undergone reparative therapy relate that they 5
were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy 6
individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction. The 7
possibility that the person might achieve happiness and satisfying 8
interpersonal relationships as a gay man or lesbian is not presented, 9
nor are alternative approaches to dealing with the effects of societal 10
stigmatization discussed; and 11
(3) Therefore, the American Psychiatric Association opposes 12
any psychiatric treatment such as reparative or conversion therapy 13
which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a 14
mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that a patient 15
should change his or her sexual homosexual orientation; 16
e. The American School Counselor Associations position 17
statement on professional school counselors and lesbian, gay, 18
bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth states: It is 19
not the role of the professional school counselor to attempt to 20
change a students sexual orientation/gender identity but instead to 21
provide support to LGBTQ students to promote student 22
achievement and personal well-being. Recognizing that sexual 23
orientation is not an illness and does not require treatment, 24
professional school counselors may provide individual student 25
planning or responsive services to LGBTQ students to promote self- 26
acceptance, deal with social acceptance, understand issues related to 27
coming out, including issues that families may face when a student 28
goes through this process and identify appropriate community 29
resources; 30
f. The American Academy of Pediatrics in 1993 published an 31
article in its journal, Pediatrics, stating: Therapy directed at 32
specifically changing sexual orientation is contraindicated, since it 33
can provoke guilt and anxiety while having little or no potential for 34
achieving changes in orientation; 35
g. The American Medical Association Council on Scientific 36
Affairs prepared a report in 1994 in which it stated: Aversion 37
therapy (a behavioral or medical intervention which pairs unwanted 38
behavior, in this case, homosexual behavior, with unpleasant 39
sensations or aversive consequences) is no longer recommended for 40
gay men and lesbians. Through psychotherapy, gay men and 41
lesbians can become comfortable with their sexual orientation and 42
understand the societal response to it; 43
h. The National Association of Social Workers prepared a 1997 44
policy statement in which it stated: Social stigmatization of 45
lesbian, gay, and bisexual people is widespread and is a primary 46
motivating factor in leading some people to seek sexual orientation 47
changes. Sexual orientation conversion therapies assume that 48
homosexual orientation is both pathological and freely chosen. No 49
4

data demonstrates that reparative or conversion therapies are 1
effective, and, in fact, they may be harmful; 2
i. The American Counseling Association Governing Council 3
issued a position statement in April of 1999, and in it the council 4
states: We oppose the promotion of reparative therapy as a 5
cure for individuals who are homosexual; 6
j. (1) The American Psychoanalytic Association issued a 7
position statement in June 2012 on attempts to change sexual 8
orientation, gender, identity, or gender expression, and in it the 9
association states: As with any societal prejudice, bias against 10
individuals based on actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender 11
identity or gender expression negatively affects mental health, 12
contributing to an enduring sense of stigma and pervasive self- 13
criticism through the internalization of such prejudice; and 14
(2) Psychoanalytic technique does not encompass purposeful 15
attempts to convert, repair, change or shift an individuals sexual 16
orientation, gender identity or gender expression. Such directed 17
efforts are against fundamental principles of psychoanalytic 18
treatment and often result in substantial psychological pain by 19
reinforcing damaging internalized attitudes; 20
k. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 21
in 2012 published an article in its journal, Journal of the American 22
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, stating: Clinicians 23
should be aware that there is no evidence that sexual orientation can 24
be altered through therapy, and that attempts to do so may be 25
harmful. There is no empirical evidence adult homosexuality can 26
be prevented if gender nonconforming children are influenced to be 27
more gender conforming. Indeed, there is no medically valid basis 28
for attempting to prevent homosexuality, which is not an illness. 29
On the contrary, such efforts may encourage family rejection and 30
undermine self-esteem, connectedness and caring, important 31
protective factors against suicidal ideation and attempts. Given that 32
there is no evidence that efforts to alter sexual orientation are 33
effective, beneficial or necessary, and the possibility that they carry 34
the risk of significant harm, such interventions are contraindicated; 35
l. The Pan American Health Organization, a regional office of 36
the World Health Organization, issued a statement in May of 2012 37
and in it the organization states: These supposed conversion 38
therapies constitute a violation of the ethical principles of health 39
care and violate human rights that are protected by international and 40
regional agreements. The organization also noted that reparative 41
therapies lack medical justification and represent a serious threat 42
to the health and well-being of affected people; 43
m. Minors who experience family rejection based on their 44
sexual orientation face especially serious health risks. In one study, 45
lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults who reported higher levels 46
of family rejection during adolescence were 8.4 times more likely to 47
report having attempted suicide, 5.9 times more likely to report high 48
levels of depression, 3.4 times more likely to use illegal drugs, and 49
5

3.4 times more likely to report having engaged in unprotected 1
sexual intercourse compared with peers from families that reported 2
no or low levels of family rejection. This is documented by Caitlin 3
Ryan et al. in their article entitled Family Rejection as a Predictor 4
of Negative Health Outcomes in White and Latino Lesbian, Gay, 5
and Bisexual Young Adults (2009) 123 Pediatrics 346; and 6
n. New Jersey has a compelling interest in protecting the 7
physical and psychological well-being of minors, including lesbian, 8
gay, bisexual, and transgender youth, and in protecting its minors 9
against exposure to serious harms caused by sexual orientation 10
change efforts. 11
12
2. a. A person who is licensed to provide professional 13
counseling under Title 45 of the Revised Statutes, including, but not 14
limited to, a psychiatrist, licensed practicing psychologist, certified 15
social worker, licensed clinical social worker, licensed social 16
worker, licensed marriage and family therapist, certified 17
psychoanalyst, or a person who performs counseling as part of the 18
person's professional training for any of these professions, shall not 19
engage in sexual orientation change efforts with a person under 18 20
years of age. 21
b. As used in this section, "sexual orientation change efforts" 22
means the practice of seeking to change a person's sexual 23
orientation, including, but not limited to, efforts to change 24
behaviors, gender identity, or gender expressions, or to reduce or 25
eliminate sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward a person 26
of the same gender; except that sexual orientation change efforts 27
shall not include counseling for a person seeking to transition from 28
one gender to another, or counseling that: 29
(1) provides acceptance, support, and understanding of a person 30
or facilitates a person's coping, social support, and identity 31
exploration and development, including sexual orientation-neutral 32
interventions to prevent or address unlawful conduct or unsafe 33
sexual practices; and 34
(2) does not seek to change sexual orientation. 35
36
3. This act shall take effect immediately. 37
38
39
STATEMENT 40
41
This bill prohibits counseling to change the sexual orientation of 42
a minor. 43
Under the provisions of the bill, a person who is licensed to 44
provide professional counseling, including, but not limited to, a 45
psychiatrist, licensed practicing psychologist, certified social 46
worker, licensed clinical social worker, licensed social worker, 47
licensed marriage and family therapist, certified psychoanalyst, or a 48
person who performs counseling as part of the person's professional 49
6

training, is prohibited from engaging in sexual orientation change 1
efforts with a person under 18 years of age. 2
The bill defines "sexual orientation change efforts" as the 3
practice of seeking to change a person's sexual orientation, 4
including, but not limited to, efforts to change behaviors or gender 5
expressions, or to reduce or eliminate sexual or romantic attractions 6
or feelings toward a person of the same gender. The term, however, 7
does not include counseling for a person seeking to transition from 8
one gender to another, or counseling that: provides acceptance, 9
support, and understanding of a person or facilitates a person's 10
coping, social support, identity exploration and development, 11
including sexual orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or 12
address unlawful conduct or unsafe sexual practices; and does not 13
seek to change sexual orientation. 14
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction - 1

TRENTON DIVISION

(AACC),

Plaintiffs,
v.


Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-5038

APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND/OR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

COME NOW Plaintiffs, DR. TARA KING, DR. RONALD NEWMAN, on behalf of
themselves and their patients, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND
THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY (NARTH), the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF

CHRISTIAN COUNSELORS (AACC) (collectively Plaintiffs), by and through the
undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local
Rule 7.1, move this Court to issue a Temporary Restraining Order and/or a Preliminary
Injunction and state:
1. Plaintiffs bring this Application for this Court to immediately restrain the enforcement of
New Jersey Assembly Bill Number 3371, An Act concerning the protection of minors from
attempts to change sexual orientation, (A3371) from violating their respective federal and
state constitutional guarantees of Freedom of Speech, Free Exercise of Religion, and the
fundamental right to direct the upbringing of ones child. Governor Christie signed this law on
August 19, 2013, it went into effect immediately, and thus time is of the essence to obtain
judicial relief because Plaintiffs, their clients, and the members of the Plaintiff Associations
are currently suffering immediate and irreparable injury to their most cherished
constitutional liberties.
2. Plaintiffs Dr. Tara King, Dr. Ronald Newman, and other NARTH and AACC members
and Plaintiffs clients are currently suffering irreparable harm that warrants the issuance of an
injunction. A3371 prohibits them from engaging in or referring to a licensed professional who
engages in counseling with a minor that honors the clients autonomy and right to self-
determination to prioritize his or her religious and moral values above unwanted same-sex sexual
attractions, behaviors, or identities. A3371 also prohibits SOCE counseling by a licensed
professional to a minor client who wants to align his or her values with a counselor who can
address these values, even when the minors parents are in complete agreement with the SOCE
counseling. In fact, however, such counseling is protected by the First Amendment and New
Jersey constitutional rights. Plaintiff counselors have a First Amendment right to engage in

constitutionally protected speech with their minor clients, and the clients have the right of self-
determination and the right to receive the counsel they desire. This counseling is also protected
by the First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion, which includes the clients right to
receive counsel based on their religious and moral values. In addition, both Plaintiffs and their
clients have the right to engage in this counseling without governmentally imposed and
unconstitutional viewpoint-based restrictions.
3. Consequently, Plaintiffs seek immediate injunctive relief restraining Defendants from
enforcing A3371 because it violates: (1) the rights of Plaintiffs and their clients to freedom of
speech and free exercise of religion, guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution, and (2) the rights of Plaintiffs and their patients to liberty of speech
and free exercise and enjoyment of religion, guaranteed by Article I, 3, 5, and 6 of the New
Jersey Constitution, and (3) the Fourteenth Amendment rights of the parents of Plaintiffs clients
to direct the upbringing of their child.
4. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1), Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged that immediate
and irreparable injury is currently being imposed on them and their clients by prohibiting the
counseling that both the counselor seeks to provide and the clients wish to receive such that
immediate injunctive relief is warranted.
5. Plaintiffs have provided Defendants with notice and a copy of all pleadings via email to
the Attorney Generals office.
GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
6. Contemporaneous with this Motion, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint seeking Declaratory
Judgment, Injunctive Relief, and Damages.

7. Following the New Jersey Legislatures passage of A3371, Defendant Governor Christie
signed A3371 on Monday, August 19, 2013, which amended Title 45 of the Revised Statutes of
New Jersey, and the law went into effect immediately. (See Compl. Ex. A).
8. Section 2(a) of A3371 states:
A person who is licensed to provide professional counseling under Title 45
of the Revised Statutes, including, but not limited to, a psychiatrist, licensed
practicing psychologist, certified social worker, licensed clinical social worker,
licensed social worker, licensed marriage and family therapist, certified
psychoanalyst, or a person who performs counseling as part of the persons
professional training for any of these professions, shall not engage in sexual
orientation change efforts with a person under 18 years of age.

9. Section 2(b) of A3371 states:
[S]exual orientation change efforts means the practice of seeking to change a
persons sexual orientation, including, but not limited to, efforts to change
behaviors, gender identity, or gender expressions, or to reduce or eliminate sexual
or romantic attractions or feelings toward a person of the same gender; except that
sexual orientation change efforts shall not include counseling for a person seeking
to transition from one gender to another, or counseling that:

(1) provides acceptance, support, and understanding of a person or
facilitates a persons coping, social support, and identity exploration and
development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or
address unlawful conduct or unsafe sexual practices; and

(2) does not seek to change sexual orientation.

10. Section 3 of A3371 states that [t]his act shall take effect immediately.

11. A3371 is currently imposing immediate harm on Plaintiffs and their clients who desire to
prioritize their religious and moral values and seek counseling consistent with those values by
preventing them from providing or seeking counseling to address the conflict and confusion
about or questions concerning their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and to
seek to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
12. A3371 directly interferes with Plaintiffs clients fundamental right to self-determination.

13. A3371 mandates licensed mental health professionals to violate a minor clients right to
self-determination by forcing him or her to withhold information that a patient reasonably could
use to make informed treatment decisions.
14. By mandating that sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) counseling options not be
discussed or engaged in by licensed mental health professionals counseling a minor client, or
even make referrals to other licensed professionals who provide SOCE counseling, Plaintiffs
minor clients will not be able to make informed decisions, and the counselors will be violating
their ethical codes by imposing their own views and value judgments upon their clients.
15. A3371 mandates that licensed mental health professionals violate their ethical duties by
prohibiting them from providing beneficial SOCE counseling to those minor clients who
willingly consent to and desire such counseling to alleviate their unwanted same-sex sexual
attractions, behaviors, or identity, even when their parents are in full agreement with the
counseling.
16. A3371 also violates Plaintiffs constitutional rights to provide counseling consistent with
the values and goals of their minor clients free from impermissible viewpoint discrimination and
content-based restrictions on their speech.
17. A3371 violate Plaintiffs minor clients First Amendment right to receive information.
18. Plaintiff Dr. Tara King is the founder the King of Hearts Counseling Center in Brick,
New Jersey, which is a Christian counseling center that focuses on counseling from a Biblical
perspective. (Declaration of Tara King 4). A copy of Dr. Kings declaration is attached hereto
as Exhibit A and incorporated herein. Dr. Kings clinic offers counseling on numerous issues,
including post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, mental difficulties, substance abuse,

grief, anger management, eating disorders, co-dependency, sex/love/relationship addictions, and
SOCE counseling, which they offer to both minors and adults. (Id.).
19. Dr. King is a former lesbian who went through SOCE counseling herself, and believes
her life is proof that SOCE counseling can and does work for individuals struggling with
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity. (Id. 5). In Dr. Kings opinion, based on
her training, experience, and personal life story, SOCE counseling is an effective method to
assist people who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and who
desire to conform their attractions, behaviors, and identity to their sincerely held religious beliefs.
(Id.). Dr. King was sexually abused as a child and experienced tremendous trauma from that
abuse and from the dysfunctional family in which she was raised. (Id. 6). In Dr. Kings opinion
and experience, this trauma and sexual abuse were the primary causes of her later developing
sexual attractions toward other women. (Id.).
20. At the age of 16, Dr. King was already involved in a same-sex relationship. (Id.). She did
not really consider herself a homosexual, even though that is what many others told her she was.
(Id.). At age 19, she started therapy for some mental health issues that resulted from her
traumatic and dysfunctional childhood, and her therapist was adamant that she was a lesbian, that
she was born a lesbian, that she would always be a lesbian, and that she should just accept and
embrace it because there was nothing that she could do about it. (Id.).
21. From ages 19-24, Dr. King continued to engage in same-sex relationships as though she
was a lesbian. (Id. 17). Dr. King simply did not understand her attractions to women, and no
one ever told her that change was possible. (Id.). At age 24, the woman who was her girlfriend at
the time told Dr. King that she had heard of counseling that could help people change their
unwanted same-sex attractions and that she wanted to try it. (Id.). This was the first time in her

life that Dr. King had ever heard anyone even mention that change was possible and that a
person did not have to continue a homosexual lifestyle if she did not want to do so. (Id.). Dr.
Kings therapist and many others constantly told her that she was always going to be a lesbian,
but after hearing from her former lover, of all people, she knew that change was possible and
wanted to see if she could succeed in changing. (Id.).
22. Dr. King attended Harvest USA, which is a Christian organization that seeks to use the
truth of Scripture to help individuals who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors,
or identity, and also individuals struggling with other sexual issues such as pornography
addictions or sexual addictions. (Id. 8). Dr. King read Steps Out of Homosexuality, by Frank
Worthen, who was also a former homosexual who had successfully changed. (Id.). Dr. King
began speaking with her former girlfriend about it and discussing her desire to leave the
homosexual lifestyle, and that she knew change was possible. (Id.). One day, she broke up with
her girlfriend and decided that she was going to change. (Id.). For five summers, Dr. King went
to programs of Exodus International, which was an organization helping homosexuals to change.
(Id.). She also frequently attended Worthy Creations, which is another group in Florida for
former homosexuals, and she began to experience the change that God had brought to her life.
(Id.).
23. Dr. King has been changed and reformed from that lifestyle for 23 years now. (Id. 9).
Because she knew that change was possible for people struggling with unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity, and the peace and emotional, mental, and spiritual health that
results from successful change, Dr. King wanted to use her skills in education and counseling to
begin to help those individuals who were struggling just as she had struggled. (Id.). She founded
the King of Hearts Counseling Center to establish a place where she could assist people with

many different mental health issues, but also to help individuals who struggle with unwanted
same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity, including minors. (Id.).
24. In her professional practice, Dr. King counsels clients for a variety of presented issues.
(Id. 10). She has had homosexual clients seeking help for depression, anxiety, distress, and
other issues, who never discussed sexual orientation, or a desire to change, so she counseled
them on the issues they chose to discuss with her. (Id.). Mental health counseling is inherently
and properly client centered, and professional ethics mandate that mental health professionals
counsel patients based solely on the clients objectives and goals. It is unethical to attempt to
impose any kind of ideology or framework on a client in counseling, so Dr. King does not even
raise SOCE discussions unless a client wants to engage in such counseling. (Id.).
25. Because she testified in front of the Legislature concerning the passage of A3371, one of
Dr. Kings existing homosexual clients approached her about why she had never informed her
that Dr. King could provide SOCE counseling to her or that change was possible if she desired to
reduce or eliminate her unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity. (Id. 11). The
client was struggling with anxiety on other issues and had expressed that her counseling goals
were to alleviate those issues, so Dr. King never brought up SOCE counseling during their
sessions. (Id.). Dr. King is happy to engage in SOCE counseling with anyone who desires to
change, but it must be what the client requests before Dr. King will begin to engage in such
counseling. (Id.).
26. Dr. Kings SOCE counseling is talk therapy and is no different than any other form of
mental health counseling. (Id. 12). The parade of horribles derived from aversion techniques,
such as electroshock treatments, pornographic viewing, nausea-inducing drugs, etc., are
unethical methods of treatment that have not been used by any ethical and licensed mental health

professional in decades. (Id.). Dr. King testified before the Legislature that mental health
professionals who engage in such techniques should have their license revoked, but that just
because those outdated and unethical treatments should be prohibited does not mean that client-
centered SOCE talk therapy should be banned. (Id.). The SOCE counseling that Dr. King
practices is simply the traditional psychodynamic process of looking at root causes, childhood
issues, developmental factors, and other things that cause a person to present with all types of
physical, mental, emotional, or psychological issues that in turn cause them distress. (Id.). Her
SOCE counseling is insight-oriented, just like every other modern form of licensed mental health
counseling. (Id.). Indeed, the only difference between Dr. Kings type of mental health
counseling and the type of counseling provided by mental health professionals like her former
therapist (who insisted that Dr. King was and would always be a lesbian) is that Dr. King
believes change is possible, and she is living proof that SOCE counseling can and does work for
some who want to change. (Id.).
27. Many of Dr. Kings clients who seek SOCE counseling tell her that their unwanted same-
sex attractions, behaviors, and identity can be traced to abuse, trauma, neglect, and unfulfilled
gender identity needs. (Id. 13). Many of her clients seeking SOCE counseling were sexually
molested. (Id.). Dr. King was a victim of sexual abuse, and in her opinion it was one of the root
causes of her same-sex attractions and behaviors. (Id.). In Dr. Kings professional opinion, the
notion that people are born homosexual is a lie unsupported by science or reality, and change is
possible for those who desire to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, and identity. (Id.). Dr. King also has good friends who are also living proof that
change is possible for those who seek and desire it, and that SOCE counseling by licensed
professionals can be an effective method by which to achieve such a desired result. (Id.).

28. Many of Dr. Kings clients, both adult and minor, are Christians and request Christian
counseling as part of the SOCE counseling that she provides. A3371 will prohibit Dr. King from
practicing her profession and her counseling with these minor clients. (Id. 14). Many of Dr.
Kings clients who seek SOCE counseling have reported varying degrees of change from
homosexuality to heterosexuality as a result of the counseling. (Id.). Dr. King has had clients
comment that after SOCE counseling, they understood exactly the underlying root causes of their
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity and why they were distressed or anxious
because of those attractions. (Id.). These clients and all minors who seek licensed SOCE
counseling will be substantially harmed by A3371 because it will force licensed counselors in
New Jersey to immediately cease providing counsel to minors seeking to reduce or eliminate
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity.
29. A3371 would arguably prohibit licensed professional counselors from even discussing
available treatment options that might help alleviate a minor clients unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity because a client might subsequently view even a simple
discussion of SOCE counseling as an effort to reduce or eliminate his or her unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity and subject the licensed counselor to ethical charges and
violations. (Id. 15). A3371 will force counselors to violate a fundamental principle of informed
consent. (Id.). Section A.2 of the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics (ACA
Code) states that all patients need adequate information about the counseling process, and that
the client has the freedom to choose the counseling relationship. (Id.). A3371 will force Dr. King
to violate this principle because it will prohibit her from even discussing the availability of
SOCE counseling with her minor clients. (Id.). Discussing her personal story, the availability of
SOCE counseling, or the notion that she believes change is possible with a minor client could be

considered an effort to change the clients sexual orientation, which would subject Dr. King to
professional ethics violations. (Id.). A3371 will therefore silence Dr. King in her counseling
sessions with minors and prohibit her from sharing my personal story with her minor clients and
helping those who seek the change that she was able to achieve. (Id.).
30. Dr. King does not force any type of therapy on any of her clients because it would be
unethical for her to do so. (Id. 16). She shows her clients unconditional, positive regard and
makes it a priority to respect what they believe about themselves concerning their sexual identity.
(Id.). A3371, however, will force her to commit an ethical violation by imposing a certain
ideologyi.e., the governments ideology against SOCE counselingon all her minor patients
who seek SOCE treatment because A3371 only permits counselors to affirm same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity. (Id.). A3371 arguably precludes counselors from even telling minor clients
with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity that there is help available. (Id.).
A3371s mandate that she impose the governments ideology regarding same-sex attractions,
behavior, or identity is a direct violation of Section A.4.b of the ACA Code, which mandates that
mental health counselors avoid imposing values that are inconsistent with counseling goals.
(Id.). A3371 forces Dr. King to ignore the minor clients values when those values and sincerely
held religious beliefs inform the client that change is possible and that SOCE counseling is an
effective method to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity. (Id.).
31. A3371 also forces Dr. King to violate Section A.11 of the ACA Code. (Id. 17). Section
A.11.a states that [c]ounselors do not abandon or neglect clients in counseling. (Id.). A3371
mandates that Dr. King abandon her minor clients who seek to reduce or eliminate their
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity because she will no longer be able to

provide the counseling that her clients desire. Section A.11.d mandates that when mental health
counselors refer a client to a different practitioner for some course of counseling, that the
referring professional ensure that appropriate clinical and administrative processes are
completed and open communication is maintained with both clients and practitioners. (Id.).
A3371 forces Dr. King to violate this provision as well, because she will no longer have any
option of referring a minor client to an appropriate licensed mental health professional. (Id.).
32. A3371 improperly prevents minor clients from obtaining the help that they desire and
that Dr. King knows, from personal experience, can benefit them. (Id. 18). Clients who want
help for unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity should be entitled to make that
decision and should not be forced by the government to receive only one position concerning a
matter of personal religious conviction. (Id.). The only option for minor clients seeking help with
their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity is to retain unlicensed counselors,
which defeats the whole purpose of licensing mental health professionals in the first place. (Id.).
33. Dr. Ron Newman received a Doctor of Philosophy degree in Psychoeducational
Processes from Temple University in 1990, a Master of Arts degree in Counseling Psychology
from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in 1980, a Bachelors Degree in Psychology from West
Virginia University in 1976, and an Associates of Arts degree in Practical Theology from Christ
for the Nations Institute in 1978. (Declaration of Ron Newman, 3). A copy of Dr. Newmans
declaration is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein. Dr. Newman has 32 years of
experience as a mental health professional and has been a Licensed Psychologist in the State of
New Jersey, since 1995. (Id.). He is currently a member of the American Psychological
Association (APA), the New Jersey Psychological Association, the Christian Association for
Psychological Studies, NARTH, and AACC. (Id. 6). He is also currently the Program Director

of the International School of Christian Counseling in Lima, Peru, and he has the primary
responsibility for developing the program for that school, which is designed to train Christian
counselors in Latin America. (Id.). He has done similar work in the past, including nineteen trips
to various South American countries in the last twenty years to teach pastors and counselors
about effective mental health counseling methods. (Id.).
34. Dr. Newmans practice is located in two offices at Hammonton, New Jersey and
Linwood, New Jersey. (Id. 7). Many of his clients come to him because of his Christian
identity and their trust that their Christian values and beliefs will be respected in treatment. (Id.).
Dr. Newmans practice is comprised of approximately 35-40 clients per week. (Id.). He counsels
individuals and families concerning stress, panic and anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress
disorder, grief, couples/marital counseling, and many other mental health issues that cause
people distress, including individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and
identity. (Id.). Dr. Newman has a Biblical worldview, and for those clients who seek counseling
from a Christian perspective and desire to conform their counseling goals to their sincerely held
religious beliefs, he focuses on Biblical integration in the counseling relationship. (Id.).
35. Part of his practice involves SOCE counseling, sometimes with minors. (Id. 8). Dr.
Newman currently has minor clients that are struggling with various issues and seeking
counseling that would be prohibited under A3371, and the law is mandating that he provide only
one viewpoint to those clients. (Id.). For example, Dr. Newman currently has a minor client who
has developed confusion about the clients sexual orientation after engaging in some
experimental behavior with a member of the same sex and has raised the issue during their
counseling sessions about whether this makes the client a homosexual, which is a situation where
A3371 would mandate only one type of counseling. As is true with much of his practice, the

individuals who seek SOCE counseling from Dr. Newman do so because they have a desire to
conform their attractions, behavior, and identity to their sincerely held religious beliefs. (Id.).
Many of these individuals seek to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity because their religious beliefs inform them that change is possible. (Id.). Dr.
Newmans experience and opinion also inform him that change is possible and he has personally
counseled individuals who have successfully reduced or eliminated their unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, and identity. (Id.).
36. Dr. Newman's first step in the process of counseling for his patients, including those
minor clients with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity, is to discover what the
patient and the parents are hoping to achieve with the counseling and to establish a clients goals.
(Id. 9). Mental health counseling should be client centered, and the clients goals and objectives
must control the counseling relationship. (Id.). When a minor patient does not want to engage in
SOCE counseling, Dr. Newmans counseling focus often shifts to helping the parents understand
the childs thinking, providing psychoeducation about homosexuality among youth, and working
within the parents religious beliefs to help them love and support their child. (Id. 10). Helping
parents love their child while valuing their own typically conservative religious faith is a key
intervention unique to therapists like Dr. Newman who would be subject to A3371. (Id.).
37. When both the minor client and the parents want SOCE counseling, then Dr. Newman
explains to them the nature of such counseling. (Id. 11). He also explains to the client that if at
any point in the course of the clients therapy the client decides he or she no longer wants to
continue counseling for same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, then he or she should inform
Dr. Newman immediately because the clients counseling should always be based on the goals
and objectives of the client. (Id.). Dr. Newman explains that SOCE counseling has been effective

for some people with unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity, but that the
counseling can sometimes invoke stress or anxiety about past events or root causes. (Id.). Dr.
Newman has counseled a number of individuals for whom SOCE has been effective and
successful, but he has also counseled individuals who determined that their same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identities were no longer unwanted but still benefitted from the counseling. (Id.).
A3371 prohibits Dr. Newmans minor clients and all minors in New Jersey from receiving any
counseling concerning unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity from licensed
professionals and is currently causing Dr. Newman and his minor patients irreparable injury and
harm.
38. Complying with A3371 would force Dr. Newman to violate Section 3.10 of the American
Psychological Associations Ethics Code (APA Code), which requires that he provide a patient
with all information necessary to make an informed decision concerning a particular course of
available counseling. (Id. 12). It would also cause Dr. Newman, when counseling minors
regarding sexual attraction issues, to violate General Ethical Principle E of the APA Code, which
requires that he ensure the patient the freedom to make a self-determined choice concerning his
therapy. (Id.). A3371 will cause him to violate those provisions because its prohibits Dr.
Newman from providing detailed information to his minor clients about the available forms of
counseling, including SOCE, so that the clients decision to choose a particular form of
counseling is properly informed. (Id.). A3371 would also prohibit Dr. Newman from making
referrals for his minor clients to other licensed counselors who can provide SOCE. (Id.).
However, failure to comply with A3371 will subject him to possible disciplinary action. (Id.).
39. Because A3371 forces Dr. Newman to violate one of his current ethical obligations or
violate A3371, which would also be an ethical violation, the law is causing him irreparable harm

by putting his professional license in jeopardy without providing any clear understanding of how
to comply with all of the requirements of the counseling profession while still providing the type
of counseling that is consistent with his minor patients sincerely held religious beliefs. (Id. 13).
40. A3371 will also cause Dr. Newman to violate Section 3.06 of the APA Code, by causing
him to enter into a relationship where his objectivity is called into question, especially since
A3371 mandates that only one ideologyi.e., the governments ideology concerning SOCEbe
shared in the counselors office regardless of the minor patients sincerely held religious beliefs,
desires, or counseling goals. (Id. 14).
41. A3371 improperly interferes with client autonomy. For those minors who desire SOCE
counseling for their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, implementation of
A3371 is causing immediate and irreparable harm by precluding them from accessing helpful
counseling from a licensed professional that the clients desire and feel is the only assistance
available to help them conform their sexual attractions, behaviors, and identity to their sincerely
held religious beliefs. (Id. 15).
42. Plaintiff NARTH is a non-profit, professional, scientific organization organized under the
laws of the state of Utah. (Declaration of David Pruden 3). A copy of David Prudens declaration
is attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein. Copies of the declarations of Dr. Christopher
Rosik and Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, submitted on behalf of NARTHs Board of Directors and Members are
attached hereto as Exhibits D and E and incorporated herein. NARTHs organizational mission is to
provide hope and information to those individuals who struggle with unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, and identity. (Id.). As an organization, NARTH is engaged in scientific
research focusing on homosexuality and therapeutic options for those individuals who might
wish to eliminate or reduce their same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity. (Id.). NARTH
provides educational information to those individuals seeking treatment options for unwanted

same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity, but respects the rights and autonomy of all of its
patients to choose their own destiny in treatment. (Id.). As such, NARTH supports the rights of
individuals to seek treatment options such as SOCE, but it does not impose any method of
treatment on its clients. (Id. 5-6).
43. NARTH offers a range of services to those clients with unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, and identity. It provides an international referral service of licensed therapists offering
SOCE counseling. (Id. 4). NARTH is engaged in extensive research concerning individuals
who have successfully reduced or eliminated their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and
identity or that sincerely desire to do so and the psychological factors that are typically
associated with the homosexual lifestyle. (Id.). NARTH offers scholarly publications and
educational information to the general public, it provides various presentations across the
country hosted by mental health professionals who specialize in SOCE counseling, and
advocates for an open discussion of all views surrounding this area. (Id.).
44. NARTH has licensed members in New Jersey that offer SOCE counseling, including to
minors who have lost the ability to continue receiving the SOCE counseling that they desire to
receive from licensed NARTH counselors and who will inevitably regress in their course of
treatment to eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. (Id. 8).
NARTHs clients have the right to self-determination to voluntarily seek licensed counseling to
align their values and to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity. (Id. 9). A3371 is causing NARTH, its licensed members, and minor clients of its
members to suffer immediate and irreparable injury as it is censoring the speech of licensed
NARTH members and depriving minor clients of beneficial psychological counseling from a
licensed professional. (Id.). Effective Monday, August 19, 2013, the State of New Jersey

immediately stepped into the office of all licensed mental health professionals in New Jersey and
mandated that they provide only one viewpoint on same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity to
their minor clients. (Id.).
45. The APA Task Force Report on SOCE counseling concluded that [s]ame-sex attractions
occur in a variety of sexual orientations and sexual orientation identities, and for some, sexual
orientation identity (i.e., individual or group membership and affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or
has an indefinite outcome. (Id. 10). A3371 currently prohibits licensed NARTH members
from engaging in any practices with their minor clients that seek to change sexual orientation or
that seek to reduce or eliminate same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity. (Id.). This
prohibition is virtually impossible to comply with because it is well understood in the mental
health profession and conceded by the APA Task Force Report that sexual orientation is difficult
to define and encompasses a number of factors, including behavior, practices, identity, and
attractions. (Id.). Given that this prohibition specifically deals with a concept the APA Task
Force Report concluded was fluid, many NARTH members will be required to guess what
practices would be prohibited under the law. (Id.).
46. A3371 also provides no guidance concerning whether licensed NARTH members can
refer a minor client to an unlicensed counselor who can engage in SOCE counseling with them
without violating some ethical standard. (Id. 11). In fact, it appears that A3371s prohibitions
require NARTHs licensed members to encourage any minor client requesting SOCE counseling
to avoid engaging in that course of treatment because it is harmful. (Id.). NARTH members have
an ethical duty to monitor the progress of any referral while still counseling the client on other
issues during the counselor-client relationship. (Id.). It appears that the bill would require
licensed NARTH members to not refer any minor client to a person who could practice SOCE

counseling because it might be a practice that seeks to reduce or eliminate someones unwanted
same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity. (Id.). This type of referral practice is far from
clear in the language of A3371, and the law does not provide any guidance on this issue despite
placing the counselors professional license in jeopardy for making the wrong conclusion. (Id.).
47. The Legislature and supporters of A3371 have consistently attempted to tie practices that
had been used in the distant past with the practices that NARTH members currently use. (Id.
12). NARTH members do not engage in any of the practices that the supporters of A3371 refer
to as aversion practices, including electric shock treatments
1
, nausea and vomiting inducing
medicine, or shame aversion. (Id.). These types of techniques have been irrelevant in
psychotherapy for decades, and it is illogical to attempt to bring these antiquated practices into
the discussion of modern practices of licensed professionals involving SOCE. (Id.). The attempt
of supporters of A3371 to lump modern therapeutic techniques with these unethical practices is
inaccurate and does not describe the therapy currently engaged in with clients by licensed
NARTH members. (Id.).
48. A3371 and its supporters make repeated references to the notion that homosexuality is
not a mental illness, that it was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Health Disorders, and that it is not a disease that needs to be changed. Nevertheless, this ignores
an important reality of the practice of psychotherapy. (Id. 14). NARTH members and many
licensed mental health professionals treat and counsel patients on numerous issues that are
neither mental illnesses or diseases, but for which large numbers of people seek treatment and

1
Ironically, the APA and other professional organizations that condemn the talk therapy
engaged in by NARTH and Plaintiffs here have recently endorsed the use of electroshock
therapy (now known as Electroconvulsive Therapy or ECT) for certain mental conditions. See,
e.g., http://www.ect.org/resources/apa.html (last accessed 8/19/13).


counseling, including grief, marital infidelity, etc. (Id.). Additionally, the question of whether
psychotherapy can help individuals does not require that what they seek treatment for be a
mental illness, nor does the fact that a client seeks to eliminate stress (same-sex attractions,
behavior or identity or otherwise) presume or mean or send the message that the client has a
mental illness. (Id.). For many people who seek SOCE counseling, homosexuality is an
adaptation that causes distress in their lives that they seek to eliminate or reduce. NARTH
members are able to help these clients deal with the distress that their unwanted same-sex sexual
attractions, behaviors, or identity can bring to their lives and help them deal with the resulting
anxiety or pressure that results. (Id.). The notion that SOCE should be banned because
homosexuality is not a mental illness is simply flawed and does not reflect the reality of many
psychotherapeutic practices. (Id.).
49. Plaintiff AACC was founded in 1989 and now has nearly 50,000 members throughout the
world, including in New Jersey. (Declaration of Eric Scalise 5). A copy of Dr. Scalises
declaration is attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein. The AACCs members represent
the entire spectrum of care, from lay/pastoral counselors to licensed mental health professionals.
AACCs clinical members include Licensed Professional Counselors, Licensed Mental Health
Counselors, Licensed Marriage & Family Therapists, Licensed Clinical Social Workers,
Licensed Clinical Psychologists, Licensed Substance Abuse Treatment Providers, Clinical Nurse
Specialists, and Psychiatrists. (Id. 6).
50. The AACC seeks to encourage and support Christian counseling worldwide; disseminate

the delivery of professional and pastoral services. (Id. 8). The AACCs members opinions and
experiences inform them that the professional research literature and a number of peer-reviewed
articles demonstrate positive support for the efficacy of faith, spirituality, and religious values as
they pertain to treatment outcomes. (Id. 9). The AACCs members opinions and experiences
inform them that the research literature supports the notion that when a client receives care
within the confines of his/her basic worldview and foundational value systemof which
religious affiliation is a significant marker for mosttreatment outcomes are more positive
(Fallot, 2001; Hage et al, 2003; Hodge, 2006; Koenig et al., 2001; Larson, 2003). (Id. 10).
51. AACCs members follow the time-honored and foundational ethical value of client self-
determination. (Id. 11). A3371 directly and significantly undermines what is considered as a
cornerstone principle in mental health counseling. (Id.). This principle can be found in the
language of the ethical codes of notable professional member organizations such as the
American Psychological Association (APA), the American Counseling Association (ACA), and
the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists (AAMFT), to name a few. (Id.).
AACCs members support the position that every client seeking mental health services has the
inherent right to participate in counseling that is in alignment with his/her religious beliefs and
faith-based values, and furthermore, to have this right vigorously protected. (Id. 12). A3371
places prospective minor clients in an untenable double bind when receiving SOCE counseling,
especially when their religious values may inform and direct their behavior, expressions, and
identity in a manner contrary to same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. (Id. 16).
Furthermore, A3371 may, in fact, represent actual harm to the minor client because it does not

allow the licensed counselor to address these competing values, leaving the client with no means
to process the potential inner conflict. (Id.).
52. While acknowledging the current controversy over the implementation of SOCE, the
general lack of conclusive research in this area, and the legitimate need for adolescents to receive
competent care when addressing issues pertaining to sexual orientation, AACCs members know
that A3371 moves far beyond its original intent to protect minor clients and represents a reckless
infringement on the religious liberties of anyone needing counseling in this area. (Id. 17).
When a clients faith values may be in conflict with other cultural values, especially as they may
pertain to the language found in A3371, that ultimately the clientand in the case of a minor,
his/her parent or legal guardianhas the moral and ethical right to participate in and determine
the appropriate course of care, including alignment with his/her relevant religious beliefs. (Id.
18). A3371 unfairly and unnecessarily discriminates against the religious liberties of the minor
client and represents an intrusive and potentially damaging dynamic regarding the delivery of
care. (Id. 19).
53. Many AACC members do not practice SOCE counseling exclusively, or in some cases, at
all. (Id. 20). Nevertheless, these counselors will be subject to the same prohibitions that experts
in SOCE face. (Id.). The APA Task Force Report revealed that not even the experts in this area
universally agree on a definition of sexual orientation. (Id.). The APA Report concluded that
[s]ame-sex sexual attractions occur in the context of a variety of sexual orientations and sexual
orientation identities, and for some, sexual orientation identity (i.e., individual or group
membership and affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or has an indefinite outcome. (Id.). This
places a tremendous burden on licensed AACC members, who though lacking expertise in this
field, are still at risk of loss of their professional license when a minor client raises the issue of

unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity in a counseling session that was not
originally understood to be prohibited counseling. (Id.). These AACC members will be left to
speculate, at the risk of losing their license, as to exactly what counsel is prohibited by A3371, as
well as the definition of sexual orientation and how to apply A3371 to any number of questions
that arise when minor clients clearly choose for their attractions, behaviors, or identity to
conform to their religious or moral values despite any unwanted sexual attractions, behaviors, or
identity. (Id.).
54. A3371 is not just about discussions of sexual orientation, but also those pertaining to a
persons behavior that may be incongruent with his or her religious or moral values. (Id. 21).
Mental health professionals need the freedom to explore a clients behavior in a manner that
incorporates discussions of the clients religious faith or values. (Id.). AACC members will be
forced to speculate as to whether the very discussion of minor clients behavior, even though it
may be incongruent with ones beliefs and values, would be considered an effort to reduce or
eliminate unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. (Id.). The same is true when
minor clients plead with a counselor to help them not to identify with a particular sexual
orientation. (Id.). Because AACC members are prohibited from such discussions, then
counselors and their minor clients are currently experiencing irreparable harm. (Id.). A3371
restricts a licensed mental health provider from freely engaging with a minor client on this
subject, regardless of any emotional or psychological duress the client may be experiencing due
to the conflict of values, and therefore creates an unacceptable therapeutic double-bind for the
client. (Id.).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:

That this Court immediately issue an injunction, restraining Defendants, Defendants
officers, agents, employees, successors, and all persons in active concert or participation with
them, from enforcing A3371 so that the status quo will be maintained during the pendency of
this action, and:
A. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to infringe the constitutional and
statutory rights of Plaintiffs or other licensed professionals in the counseling of their minor
clients or from offering a viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject matter;
B. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to prohibit Plaintiffs or other
licensed professionals from engaging in SOCE counseling with those minor clients who seek
such treatment;
C. Defendants will not use A3371 to prohibit Plaintiffs clients and their parents
from seeking or receiving SOCE for unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or
identity; and
D. Defendants will not use A3371 in any manner to punish Plaintiffs, their clients,
or others for engaging, referring to, seeking, or receiving SOCE counseling.


RULE 65(B) CERTIFICATION
In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b), Plaintiffs have given notice to Defendants by
sending via facsimile a copy of all pleadings filed in this action to the Attorney General of New
Jersey.

Respectfully submitted,

Demetrios Stratis
Mathew D. Staver*
Stephen M. Crampton*
Daniel J. Schmid*
Liberty Counsel
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
P.O. Box 11108
Lynchburg, VA 24502
Tel. 434-592-7000
Fax: 434-592-7700
court@LC.org

* Application to appear Pro Hac Vice
pending


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed electronically with
the court on August 23, 2013. Service will be effectuated by the Courts electronic notification
system upon all counsel of record.

Demetrios Stratis

Declaration of Tara King - 1

CAMDEN DIVISION

(AACC),

Plaintiffs,
v.


Defendants.

Case No. ________

DECLARATION OF DR. TARA KING
I, Dr. Tara King, hereby declare as follows:
1. I am over the age of 18 and am one of the Plaintiffs in this action. The statements in this
Declaration are true and correct and if called upon to testify to them I would and could do so competently.
2. I am submitting this Declaration in support of Plaintiffs Motion for a Preliminary Injunction.

3. I received a Doctor of Education degree in Administration from Nova Southeastern University in
2000. I received a Master of Arts degree in Christian Counseling from Liberty University in 1993, and
received another Master of Arts degree in Special Education from New Jersey City University in 2003. In
1987, I received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Counseling from the University of Sioux Falls. In 1999, I
became certified as a Licensed Professional Counselor. I am also a specialist in substance abuse related
treatment, and have been certified as a Substance Awareness Coordinator and am a Licensed Clinical
Alcohol and Drug Counselor. I have extensive experience in helping minors and in being able to meet
their needs in both education and counseling. I have served in the education system as both a Special
Education Teacher and an Administrator of Schools. That experience gives me a unique perspective and
allows me to understand practical approaches to counseling minors and in helping those minors who
struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. My curriculum vitae is attached to
this declaration as Attachment A.
4. In 2000, I founded the King of Hearts Counseling Center in Brick, New Jersey, which is a
Christian counseling center that focuses on counseling from a Biblical perspective. The mission of King
of Hearts Counseling Center is to provide Holistic Health, addressing the emotional, physical, mental,
social, and spiritual elements of life and also to integrate the clients sincerely held religious beliefs into
the counseling relationship. There are currently two other licensed mental health counselors at King of
Hearts. We offer counseling on numerous issues, including post traumatic stress disorder, depression,
anxiety, mental difficulties, substance abuse, grief, anger management, eating disorders, co-dependency,
sex/love/relationship addictions, and sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) counseling, which we
offer to both minors and adults.
5. I am a former lesbian who went through SOCE counseling, and my life is proof that SOCE
counseling can and does work for individuals struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors,
or identity. In my opinion, based on my training, experience, and personal life story, SOCE counseling is
an effective method to assist people who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or

identities and who desire to conform their attractions, behaviors, and identities to their sincerely held
religious beliefs.
6. I was sexually abused as a child and experienced tremendous trauma from that abuse and from
the dysfunctional family in which I was raised. In my opinion and experience, this trauma and sexual
abuse were the primary causes of my later developing sexual attractions towards other women. At the
tender age of 16, I was already involved in a same-sex relationship. I did not really consider myself a
homosexual and did not define myself as a lesbian, even though that is what many others told me I was.
At age 19, I started therapy for some mental health issues that resulted from my traumatic and
dysfunctional childhood, and my therapist was adamant that I was a lesbian, that I was born a lesbian, that
I would always be a lesbian, and that I should just accept and embrace it because there was nothing that I
could do about it.
7. From ages 19-24, I continued to engage in same-sex relationships as though I was a lesbian. I
continued with these attractions because no one ever told me that change was possible. When I was 24,
the woman who was my girlfriend at the time told me that she had heard of this thing called SOCE
counseling and that she wanted to start trying it. This was the first time in my life that I had ever heard
anyone even mention that change was possible and that a person did not have to continue a homosexual
lifestyle if they did not want to do so. My therapist and many others constantly told me that I was always
going to be a lesbian, but after hearing from my former lover, of all people, I knew that change was
possible and wanted to see if I could succeed in changing.
8. The ministry I attended is called Harvest USA, which is a Christian organization that seeks to use
the truth of Scripture to help individuals who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity, and also individuals struggling with other sexual issues such as pornography addictions or sexual
addictions. It was at this ministry that I began to understand that I could change and that my Christian
values could be the priority goal in my life. I began to read Steps Out of Homosexuality by Frank
Worthen, who was also a former homosexual who had successfully changed. I began speaking with my
girlfriend about it and discussing my desire to leave the homosexual lifestyle, and that I knew change was

possible. That day, I broke up with my girlfriend and decided that I was going to change. For five
summers, I went to programs of Exodus International, which was an organization helping homosexuals to
change. I also frequently attended Worthy Creations, which is another group in Florida for former
homosexuals, and I began to experience the change that God had brought to my life.
9. I have been changed and reformed from that lifestyle for 23 years now. Because I knew that
change was possible for people struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identities,
and the peace and emotional, mental and spiritual health that results from successful change, I wanted to
use my skills in education and counseling to begin to help those individuals who were struggling just as I
had struggled. I founded the King of Hearts Counseling Center to establish a place where I could assist
people with many different mental health issues, but also to help individuals who struggle with unwanted
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
10. In my professional practice, I counsel clients for a variety of presented issues. I have had
homosexual clients seeking help for depression, anxiety, distress, and other issues, that never discussed
sexual orientation, or a desire to change, but I counseled them on the issues they chose to discuss with me.
Mental health counseling is inherently and properly client centered, and professional ethics mandate that
mental health professionals counsel patients based solely on the clients objectives and goals. It is
unethical to attempt to impose any kind of ideology or framework on a client in counseling, so I do not
even raise SOCE discussions unless a client wants to engage in such counseling.
11. Because I had testified in front of the legislature concerning the passage of A3371, one of my
existing homosexual clients approached me about why I had never informed her that I could provide
SOCE counseling to her or that change was possible if she desired to reduce or eliminate her unwanted
same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity. She was struggling with anxiety on other issues and
had expressed that her counseling goals were to alleviate those issues, so I never brought up SOCE
counseling during our sessions. I am happy to engage in SOCE counseling with anyone who desires to
change, but I do not force such counseling on anyone. It must be what the client requests before I will
begin to engage in such counseling.

12. SOCE counseling is talk therapy. It is no different than any other form of mental health
counseling. The parade of horribles of aversion techniques, such as electroshock treatments, pornographic
viewing, nausea-inducing drugs, etc. are unethical methods of treatment that have not been used by any
ethical and licensed mental health professional in decades. Mental health professionals who engage in
such techniques should have their licenses revoked. Nevertheless, just because those outdated and
unethical treatments should be prohibited does not mean that client centered SOCE talk therapy should be
banned. The SOCE counseling that I practice is simply the traditional psychodynamic process of looking
at root causes, childhood issues, developmental factors, and other things that cause a person to present
with all types of physical, mental, emotional, or psychological issues that in turn cause them distress. This
type of SOCE counseling is insight-oriented, just like every other modern form of mental health
counseling, and it should not be banned simply because some people disagree with the fact that change is
possible. Indeed, the only difference between my type of mental health counseling and the type of
counseling provided by mental health professionals like my former therapist (who insisted that I was and
would always be a lesbian) is that I believe change is possible, and I am living proof that SOCE
counseling can and does work for some who want to change.
13. Many of my clients who seek SOCE counseling tell me that their unwanted same-sex attractions,
behavior, or identity can be traced to abuse, trauma, neglect, and unfulfilled gender identity needs. Many
of my clients seeking SOCE counseling were sexually molested. I was a victim of sexual abuse, and in
my opinion it was one of the root causes of my same-sex attractions. In my professional opinion, the
notion that people are born homosexual is a lie unsupported by science or reality, and change is possible
for those who desire to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity. I
have good friends who are also living proof that change is possible for those who seek and desire it, and
that SOCE counseling can be an effective method by which to achieve such a desired result.
14. Many of my clients, both adult and minor, are Christians and request Christian counseling as part
of the SOCE counseling that I provide. A3371 will prohibit me from practicing my profession and my
counseling with these clients according to the sincerely held religious beliefs that both my clients and I

have. Many of my clients who seek SOCE counseling have reported varying degrees of change from
homosexuality to heterosexuality as a result of the counseling. I have had clients comment that after
SOCE counseling, they understood exactly the underlying root causes of their unwanted same-sex
attractions, behavior, or identity and why they were distressed or anxious because of it.
15. A3371 would prohibit professional counselors from even discussing available treatment options
that might help alleviate a clients unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity because a client
might subsequently view even a simple discussion of SOCE counseling as an effort to reduce or eliminate
his or her unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and subject the counselor to ethical
charges and violations. A3371 will force counselors to violate a fundamental principle of informed
consent. Section A.2 of the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics (ACA Code) states that
all patients need adequate information about the counseling process, and that the client has the freedom
to choose the counseling relationship. A3371 will force me to violate this principle because it will
prohibit me from even discussing the availability of SOCE counseling. Discussing my personal story, the
availability of SOCE counseling, or the notion that I believe change is possible could be considered an
effort to change a clients sexual orientation, which would subject me to professional ethics violations.
A3371 will therefore silence me in my counseling sessions and prohibit me from sharing my personal
story with my clients and helping those who seek the change that I was able to achieve.
16. I do not force any type of therapy on any of my clients because it would be unethical for me to do
so. I show my clients unconditional, positive regard and make it a priority to respect what they believe
about themselves concerning their sexual identity. A3371, however, will force me to commit an ethical
violation by imposing a certain ideologyi.e., the governments ideology against SOCE counselingon
all my patients who seek SOCE treatment because A3371 only permits counselors to affirm same-sex
attractions. It arguably precludes counselors from even telling clients with unwanted same-sex attractions
that there is help available. A3371s mandate that I impose the governments ideology regarding same-
sex attractions is a direct violation of Section A.4.b of the ACA Code, which mandates that mental health
counselors avoid imposing values that are inconsistent with counseling goals. A3371 forces me to

ignore the clients values when those values and sincerely held religious beliefs inform the client that
change is possible and that SOCE counseling is an effective method to reduce or eliminate their unwanted
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
17. A3371 also forces me to violate Section A.11 of the ACA Code. Section A.11.a states that
[c]ounselors do not abandon or neglect clients in counseling. A3371 mandates that I abandon my clients
who seek to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity because I will
no longer be able to provide the counseling that my clients desire. Section A.11.d mandates that when
mental health counselors refer a client to a different practitioner for some course of counseling, that the
referring professional ensure that appropriate clinical and administrative processes are completed and
open communication is maintained with both clients and practitioners. A3371 forces me to violate this
provision as well, because I will no longer have any option of referring a client to an appropriate licensed
mental health professional.
18. A3371 improperly prevents clients from obtaining the help that they desire and that I know, from
personal experience, can benefit them. Clients who want help for unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity should be entitled to make that decision and should not be forced by the government
to receive only one position concerning a matter of personal religious conviction. The only option for
clients seeking help with their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity is to retain unlicensed
counselors, which defeats the whole purpose of licensing mental health professionals in the first place.
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States and New Jersey that the
foregoing statements are true and accurate.
Executed this ___20th__ day of August, 2013.

Declaration of Ron Newman, Ph.D. - 1

CAMDEN DIVISION

TARA KING, ED.D, individually and on
(AACC),
Plaintiffs,

v.

Defendants.

Case No. ________

DECLARATION OF DR. RONALD NEWMAN
I, Dr. Ron Newman, hereby declare as follows:

1. I am over the age of 18 and am one of the Plaintiffs in this action. The statements in this
Declaration are true and correct and if called upon to testify to them I would and could do so
competently.
2. I am submitting this Declaration in support of Plaintiffs Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
3. I received a Doctor of Philosophy degree in Psychoeducational Processes from Temple
University in 1990. I received a Master of Arts degree in Counseling Psychology from Trinity
Evangelical Divinity School in 1980, a Bachelors Degree in Psychology from West Virginia
University in 1976, and an Associates of Arts degree in Practical Theology from Christ for the
Nations Institute in 1978. I have over 33 years of experience as a mental health professional and
have been a Licensed Psychologist (NJ Lic. # 03257) in the State of New Jersey, since 1995. I
am a Board Certified Professional Christian Counselor through the American Association of
Christian Counselors. My Resume is attached to this declaration as Attachment A.
4. I am the Founder of the Christian Counseling Consortium of South Jersey (CCC),
which is an active group of approximately 50 licensed and unlicensed mental health
professionals, counselors, and pastors committed to engaging in counseling from a Christian
perspective founded on the truths inherent in Scripture and with approximately 200 people who
have expressed an interest and are on our mailing list. I founded the CCC in 1998 to provide a
forum for mental health professionals and counselors to come together to focus on and discuss
contemporary issues of concern and to provide mutual support to church counselors, Christian
mental health professionals, and pastors. The CCC offers Christ-centered training for licensed
mental health professionals and others involved in Christian counseling, mental health, and
spiritual formation.

5. The CCCs mission is to encourage and support one another in our service to Jesus Christ
through the ministry and/or vocation of Christian counseling, as well as cooperate in serving the
body of Christ and the community at large. This mission is derived from Galatians 6:9-10, which
states let us not grow weary in well doing; for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not. As
we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the
household of faith. The CCC purpose is to carry this Scriptural command into the field of
mental health counseling. This is accomplished purpose through prayer, fellowship, sharing
resources, mutual case-consultations, jointly sponsoring educational and training events, and
other creative responses to the needs of the community and the individuals who seek mental
health counseling in accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs. Those who participate
in the CCC seek to help people in need of counseling consistent with their religious beliefs,
which also includes individuals seeking assistance with unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identitysome of whom are minors.
6. I am currently a member of the American Psychological Association (APA), the New
Jersey Psychological Association (NJPA), the Christian Association for Psychological Studies
(CAPS), the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), and
the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC). I have made nineteen trips to
various South American countries in the last twenty years to teach pastors and counselors about
effective mental health counseling methods. In the past year, I became the Program Director of
the new International School of Christian Counseling in Lima, Peru, and have the primary
responsibility for developing this program which is designed to train Christian counselors in
Latin America.

7. My practice is located at two offices in Hammonton, New Jersey and Linwood, New
Jersey. Many of my clients come to me because of my Christian identity and their trust that their
Christian values and beliefs will be respected in treatment. My practice is comprised of
approximately 35 - 40 clients per week. I counsel individuals and families concerning stress,
panic and anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, grief, couples/marital counseling,
and many other mental health issues that cause people distress, including individuals with
unwanted same-sex attractions. I have a Biblical worldview, and for those clients who seek
counseling from a Christian perspective and desire to conform their counseling goals with their
sincerely held religious beliefs, I focus on Biblical integration in the counseling relationships
which I form with them.
8. Part of my practice involves what is often called sexual orientation change efforts
(SOCE) counseling, sometimes with minors. I currently have clients who are struggling with
issues that would fall under the prohibitions outlined in A3371, and the law is mandating that I
provide only one viewpoint in my counseling with those minor clients. For example, I currently
have a minor client who has developed confusion about the clients sexual orientation after
engaging in some experimental behavior with a member of the same sex and has raised the issue
during our counseling sessions about whether this makes the client a homosexual, which is a
situation where A3371 would mandate only one type of counseling. As is true with much of my
practice, the individuals who seek SOCE counseling from me do so because they have a desire to
conform their attractions, behavior, and identity to their sincerely held religious beliefs. Many of
these individuals seek to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions because their
religious beliefs inform them that change is possible. I also believe that change is possible and

have personally counseled individuals who have successfully reduced or eliminated their
unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
9. My first step in the process of counseling for my patients, including those minor clients
with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity is to discover what the patient and the
parents are hoping to achieve with the counseling and to establish a clients goals. Mental health
counseling should be client centered, and the clients goals and objectives must control the
counseling relationship.
10. When a minor patient does not want to engage in SOCE counseling, my counseling focus
often shifts to helping the parents understand the childs thinking, providing psychoeducation
about homosexuality among youth, and working within the parents religious beliefs to help
them love and support their child. Helping parents love their child while valuing their own
typically conservative religious faith is key intervention I believe unique to therapists like me
who would be subject to A3371.
11. When both the minor client and the parents want SOCE counseling, then I explain to
them the nature of such counseling. I also explain to the client that if at any point in the course of
the clients therapy the client decides he no longer wants to continue counseling for same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity, then he should inform me immediately because the clients
counseling should always be based on the goals and objectives of the client. I explain that SOCE
counseling has been effective for some people with unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or
identity, but that the counseling can sometimes invoke stress or anxiety about past events or root
causes. I have counseled a number of individuals for whom SOCE has been effective and
successful, but I have also counseled individuals who determined that their same-sex attractions,

behaviors, or identities were no longer unwanted. Many of the individuals I counseled that
decided to stop the SOCE counseling still benefited from the counseling sessions.
12. Complying with A3371 would cause me to violate Section 3.10 of the American
Psychological Associations Ethics Code (APA Code), which requires that I provide a patient
with all information necessary to make an informed decision concerning a particular course of
available counseling. It would also cause me to infringe General Ethical Principle E of the APA
Code requiring that I ensure the patient the freedom to make a self-determined choice concerning
his therapy. A3371 will cause me to violate those provisions because its prohibits me from
providing detailed information to my clients about the available forms of counseling, including
SOCE, so that the clients decision to choose a particular form of counseling is properly
informed. A3371 would also prohibit me from making referrals to other licensed counselors who
can provide SOCE. However, failure to comply with A3371 will subject me to possible
disciplinary action.
13. Because A3371 forces me to violate one of my current ethical obligations or violate
A3371, which would also be an ethical violation, the law is certain to cause irreparable harm to
my practice by putting my professional license in jeopardy without providing any clear
understanding of how to comply with all of the requirements of the counseling profession while
still providing the type of counseling that is consistent with my minor patients sincerely held
religious beliefs.
14. A3371 will also cause me to violate Section 3.06 of the APA Code by causing me to
enter into a relationship where my objectivity is called into question, especially since A3371
mandates that only one ideologyi.e., the governments ideology concerning SOCEbe shared

in the counselors office regardless of the patients sincerely held religious beliefs, desires, or
counseling goals.
15. A3371 improperly interferes with client autonomy. For those minors who desire SOCE
counseling for their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, implementation of
A3371 will cause immediate and irreparable harm by precluding them from accessing helpful
counseling from a licensed professional that the client desires and feels is the only assistance
available to help them conform their sexual attractions, behaviors, and identity to their sincerely
held religious beliefs.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of
New Jersey that the foregoing statements are true and accurate.

Executed this _20th__ day of August, 2013.

CAMDEN DIVISION
(AACC),
Plaintiffs,
v.
Defendants.
CaseNo. __ _
DECLARA TION OF DAVID PRUDEN
I, David Pruden, hereby declare as follows:
Declaration of David Pruden - 1
1. I am over the age of 18 and am submitting this Declaration on behalf of NARTH, one of
the Plaintiffs in this action. The statements in this Declaration are true and correct and if called
upon to testify to them I would and could do so competently.
2. I am submitting this Declaration in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction.
3. I am the Vice President of Operations for the National Association for Research and
Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). NARTH has hundreds of affiliated counselors,
psychologists, and psychotherapists, and seventeen of those members practice in New Jersey.
NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with
unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity. As an organization, NARTH disseminates
educational information, conducts and collects scientific research, promotes effective therapeutic
counseling, and provides international referrals to those who seek its assistance.
4. NARTH is engaged in extensive research concerning individuals who have successfully
reduced or eliminated their unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity and the
psychological factors that are typically associated with a homosexual lifestyle. NARTH offers
scholarly publications and educational information to the general public. NARTH provides
various presentations across the country hosted by mental health professionals who specialize in
what is referred to in A3371 as sexual orientation change efforts ("SOCE") counseling.
5. NARTH advocates for an open discussion of all viewpoints concerning SOCE counseling
and its potential benefits or harms to patients. NARTH supports the rights of individuals with
unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity, including minors, to receive effective
psychological care, including SOCE counseling, and the rights of professionals to offer that care.
6. NARTH does not advocate for or support imposing its ideology on any patient and seeks
to offer the course of counseling desired by the patient in accordance with the patient's right to
self-determination.
7. A3371 prohibits mental health providers from engaging in SOCE counseling, defined as
"the practice of seeking to change a person's sexual orientation, including, but not limited to,
efforts to change behaviors, gender identity, or gender expressions, or to reduce or eliminate
sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward a person of the same gender." NARTH's
dissemination of educational information regarding same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity
and promotion of effective therapeutic counseling for those with unwanted same-sex attractions,
behavior, or identity appears to fall within the category of conduct A3371 prohibits.
Disseminating information about, and providing referrals for, SOCE counseling would place its
licensed professional members at risk of being found in violation of their respective professional
codes of conduct.
8. NARTH members currently have clients who receive SOCE counseling in New Jersey.
Some of the clients of NARTH members are minors who would lose all ability to continue
receiving the SOCE counseling that they desire. These minor clients would suffer regression in
their course of counseling as a result of their counselors being prohibited from continuing to
offer the counseling desired by the client. Even though A3371 has become law, NARTH
members will continue to have minor clients approach them concerning a desire to reduce or
eliminate unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior, or identity. In fact, some NARTH members
report that five to ten percent of their practices involve SOCE counseling and that nearly half of
those seeking such counseling are minors.
9. NARTH's clients have the right to self-determination to voluntarily seek counseling to
align their values and to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity. A3371 is causing NARTH, its members, and clients of its members to suffer immediate
and irreparable injury as it will censor the speech of NARTH members and deprive minor clients
of beneficial psychological counseling from a licensed professional. Effective Monday, August
19, 2013, the State of New Jersey immediately stepped into the office of all licensed mental
health professionals in New Jersey and mandated that they provide only one viewpoint on same-
sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
10. The APA Task Force Report on SOCE counseling concluded that "[s]ame-sex attractions
occur in a variety of sexual orientations and sexual orientation identities, and for some, sexual
orientation identity (i.e., individual or group membership and affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or
has an indefinite outcome." A3371 currently prohibits NARTH members from engaging in any
practices that seek to change sexual orientation or that seek to reduce or eliminate same-sex
sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity. This prohibition is virtually impossible to comply with
because it is well understood in the mental health profession and conceded by the APA Task
Force Report, that sexual orientation is difficult to define and encompasses a number of factors,
including behavior, practices, identity, and attractions. Given that this prohibition specifically
deals with a concept the APA Task Force Report concluded was "fluid," many NARTH
members will be required to guess at what practices would be prohibited under the law.
11. A3371 also provides no guidance concerning whether NARTH members can refer a
client to an unlicensed counselor who can engage in SOCE counseling with them without
violating some ethical standard. In fact, it appears that A3371 's prohibitions would require our
members to encourage any client requesting SOCE counseling to avoid engaging in that course
of treatment because it is harmful. NARTH members have an ethical duty to monitor the
progress of any referral while still counseling the client on other issues during the counselor-
client relationship. It appears that the bill would require NARTH members to not refer any client
to a person who could practice SOCE counseling because it might be a practice that seeks to
reduce or eliminate someone's unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity. This
type of referral practice is far from clear in the language of A3371 and does not provide me any
guidance on this issue despite placing my professional license in jeopardy for making the wrong
conclusion.
12. The Legislature and supporters of A3371 have consistently attempted to tie practices that
had been used in the distant past with the practices that NARTH members currently use. NARTH
members do not engage in any of the practices that the supporters of A3371 refer to as "aversion
practices," including electric shock treatments, nausea and vomiting inducing medicine, or
shame aversion. These types of techniques have been irrelevant in psychotherapy for decades,
and it is illogical to attempt to bring these antiquated practices into the discussion of modem
practices involving SOCE. The attempt of supporters of A3371 to lump modem therapeutic
techniques with these unethical practices is inaccurate and does not describe the therapy
currently engaged in with clients by NARTH members.
13. A3371 and its supporters make repeated references the notion that homosexuality is not a
mental illness, that it was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health
Disorders, and that it is not a disease that needs to be changed. Nevertheless, this ignores an
important reality of the practice of psychotherapy. NARTH members and many of mental health
professionals treat and counsel patients on numerous things that are neither mental illnesses or
diseases. Some examples of things NARTH members and other professionals counsel clients
concerning are pornography addictions, marital infidelity, masturbation obsessions, and
promiscuous lifestyles such as "swinging." None of these are mental illnesses, yet large numbers
of people seek treatment and counseling for them. Additionally, the question of whether
psychotherapy can help an individual does not require that what they seek treatment for be a
mental illness, nor does the fact a client seeks to eliminate stress (same-sex attractions, behavior
or identity or otherwise), presume or mean or send the message that the client has a mental
illness. For many people who seek SOCE, homosexuality is an adaptation that causes distress in
their lives and that they seek to eliminate or reduce. NARTH members are able to help these
clients deal with the distress that their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or
identity can bring to their lives and help them deal with the resulting anxiety or pressure that
results. The notion that SOCE should be banned because homosexuality is not a mental illness is
simply flawed and does not reflect the reality of many psychotherapeutic practices
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States and New Jersey that
the foregoing statements are true and accurate.
Executed this "to day of August, 2013.
David Pruden
Declaration of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi - 1

CAMDEN DIVISION

(AACC),

Plaintiffs,
v.


Proponents of A3371s.

Case No. ________

DECLARATION OF DR. JOSEPH NICOLOSI
I, Joseph Nicolosi, hereby declare as follows:

1. I am over the age of 18 and am submitting this Declaration as expert testimony on behalf
of NARTH members and the NARTH Board of Directors. The statements in this Declaration are
true and correct and if called upon to testify to them I would and could do so competently.
2. I am submitting this Declaration in support of Plaintiffs Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction.
BACKGROUND
3. I have been a licensed psychologist in California since 1980. I have a Bachelor of Arts
Degree in Psychology from Long Island University. I received my Masters of Arts degree in
Psychology from the New School for Social Research and my Doctor of Philosophy in Clinical
Psychology from the California School of Professional Psychology. I am the Founder and
Clinical Director of Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic in Encino, California, which is a
clinic providing mental health counseling currently to 135 clients. Ninety percent of those clients
are individuals struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, and identity, and sixty
percent are teenagers. While the Clinic specializes in helping people with unwanted same-sex
attractions, behaviors, and identity, the four mental health professionals providing service at the
clinic do counsel on any issue for which the client is seeking help.
4. I am one of the three founding members and a former president of the NARTH, which is
a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with same sex
attractions by providing information, counseling, research, and referrals. I have published
numerous books, articles, and other scholarly works on the topic of homosexuality and the
course of treatment for those individuals who seek to reduce or eliminate their unwanted same-
sex attractions. In my practice, I specialize in the treatment and counseling of males who struggle
with unwanted same-sex attractions.

5. In addition to the numerous books and scholarly articles that I have written and the
extensive education I have received in the United States, I have also participated in numerous
international training seminars occurring all over the world in places including Germany, Italy,
England, Mexico, and Poland.
6. My background and experience in the field of clinical psychology and a list of my
published articles, books, and book chapters are described in my curriculum vitae, which is
attached to this Declaration as Exhibit A.
DESCRIPTION OF PRACTICE AND INFORMED CONSENT
7. Prior to engaging in SOCE counseling with patients, I and most NARTH members
provide clients with a consent form that outlines the nature of the treatment, the potential benefits
and risks, including the fact that some psychotherapists believe that sexual orientation cannot or
should not be changed, and informs the client that success in any method of psychotherapy is not
guaranteed and could potentially be harmful. In my consent form, I explicitly state that I do not,
nor does anyone at my clinic, provide gay-affirming treatment and that clients should seek an
alternative therapist to help them if that is their stated objective.
8. I and most NARTH members also explain that if at any point in the course of the clients
therapy, the client decides that he no longer wants therapy for unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity, then he should inform the counselor immediately because a clients course
of treatment should always be based on his objectives. Related to this, I explain that if the client
decides during the course of SOCE counseling that he wants therapy that affirms his same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity, then it would be best for the client to seek an alternative
therapist.

9. I and most NARTH members explain to our clients that the nature of SOCE counseling is
such that many people report benefits from the counseling, but that it can invoke initial feelings
of stress and anxiety; that many experience a reduction in same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity; and that often a person will continue to experience some level same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity even after therapy. I explain that as with other issues people face in their
lives, many people report that their recognition of their heterosexual potential and identity is a
lifelong process that continues with them after therapy.
10. My SOCE counseling consists of discussions with the client concerning the nature and
cause of their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity; the extent of these
attractions, behaviors, or identity; assistance in understanding traditional, gender-appropriate
behaviors and characteristics; and assistance in fostering and developing those gender-
appropriate behaviors and characteristics.
11. Most of the patients with unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity
who seek SOCE do so to develop and foster healthy, heterosexual relationships and seek the
elimination or reduction of their unwanted same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity. I
have had many clients who, through SOCE counseling, have been able to succeed in reducing
their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and have reported a marked increase
in their recognition of their heterosexual potential.
12. I have also had clients who decided that they wanted to remain in the homosexual
lifestyle, but report that SOCE counseling helped them to understand the nature of their
homosexual identity and, as a result, were able to better cope with that identity after SOCE
counseling. These same clients who decide to remain in the homosexual lifestyle have reported
that they experienced no harm as a result of SOCE counseling.

THE A3371 SOCE BAN IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE REPORT OF THE
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION TASK FORCE ON APPROPRIATE
THERAPEUTIC RESPONSES TO SEXUAL ORIENTATION

13. The underlying foundation for a ban on SOCE as set forth in A3371 is the unfounded
reliance by A3371 proponents upon the Report of the American Psychological Association Task
Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation (the APA Report).
14. The APA Report, however, has countless methodological flaws and reaches erroneous
conclusions because of the ideological persuasion of the Task Force members who drafted it.
The first evidence of the flaws in the methodology behind the APA Report is that it included no
practitioners of sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) counseling. In fact, the APA rejected
every practitioner of SOCE counseling that applied for membership on the Task Force. Many of
the applicants that the APA rejected were prominent scholars in the field of same-sex attractions,
behaviors, and identity, and SOCE counseling, including A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., George Rekers,
Ph.D., Stanton Jones, Ph.D., Mark Yarhouse, Ph.D., and me.
15. The APA violated long-established scientific principles by intentionally rejecting all
practitioners of SOCE and prohibiting the participation of individuals with differing views,
values, and practice. The scientific methodology used by the Task Force is flawed because the
only voices included in the APA Report are well known for their disapproval of any efforts by
homosexual individuals to seek change, even when those individuals seek such change in order
to live in accordance with their sincerely-held religious or moral beliefs. Even the proponents of
anti-SOCE legislation like A3371 attest to the need for objective and unbiased opinion when
conducting a study of this nature.
16. The scientific bias of the APA Report is evidenced by four specific factors. First, the
APA Report failed to review the well-documented psychological and medical health risks

associated with homosexual and bisexual behavior. Neil E. Whitehead, Homosexuality and Co-
Morbidity: Research and Therapeutic Implications, The Journal of Human Sexuality II, 156
(2010) (recent studies have found essentially the same suicide rates for same-sex attracted
people in the US as other countries with decades of acceptance of people with same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity) (A copy of this Article is attached as Exhibit B). Second, the
APA Report failed to consider the factors associated with the development of homosexual
attractions and merely assumed that homosexuality is as developmentally normal as
heterosexuality. Yet, the APA Report would concede that the causes of homosexuality are
unknown. Third, the APA Report did not study individuals who reported success from SOCE
counseling, apparently because it considered change unnecessary and undesirable. Fourth, the
APA Report elevated the standard for success in treatment for unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity, and this standard is far higher than the standard for success applicable to
any other course of psychological treatment. Many other courses of treatment also have
notorious reputations for resistance to success, specifically courses of treatment for narcissism,
borderline personality disorder, and alcohol and drug abuse, but there is no debate about the
usefulness of these courses of treatment. The Task Force also criticized SOCE studies on the
grounds that the studies had high dropout rates. However, many treatment cohorts have high
dropout rates; take, for example, a drug and alcohol treatment program (Polich, Armor, & Baker,
1981). James E. Phelan, et al., A Critical Evaluation of the Report of the Task Force on
Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation, Resolutions, and Press Release, The
Journal of Human Sexuality IV, 46 (2012) (A copy of this article is attached as Exhibit C).
Nevertheless, the APA Report ignored any potential comparison to these treatment options and
also ignored the fact that psychologists continue to engage in these courses of treatment despite

their uncertain outcomes. Additionally, these courses of treatment all continue with the blessing
of the APA and all of the other professional organizations that criticize SOCE counseling.
17. Proponents of A3371 seek to increase the burden on SOCE counselors by defining
success in any course of treatment as requiring that it must achieve its intended goals all or most
of the time. If this standard applied to other forms of psychological treatment, then many widely-
used and noncontroversial courses of treatment would not qualify as effective. As mentioned in
the previous paragraph, there are a number of courses of treatment that have reputations for
resistance to success, and no one seeks to apply this heightened standard of near perfection to
these courses of treatment. That the APA Report singled out SOCE alone for this absurd standard
is itself strong evidence of the bias of its members. Indeed, there would be no effective
psychological courses of treatment if all courses of therapy were subjected to the standard
espoused by the APA Report.
18. The APA Report flatly contradicts many points that specifically refute the assertions
made by proponents of A3371. On page two, the APA Report states that none of the recent
research, which are all studies from 1999-2007, meet the methodological standards for
determining the efficacy, safety, or dangers of SOCE counseling. This undermines the assertions
of proponents of A3371 that SOCE counseling is harmful to minors. Just as the research
allegedly fails to prove SOCEs efficacy, the APA Report concedes it fails to prove any concrete
harm. See Ex. C, Journal of Human Sexuality IV at 57-58. Furthermore, on page 25, the APA
Report concedes that there needs to be more research and analysis of the potential benefits or
dangers of SOCE counseling. In fact, on page 42, the APA Report specifically found that there
was a dearth of information based on sound scientific research concerning the safety of SOCE
counseling. The dearth of scientific study prevents blanket assertions by proponents of A3371

that SOCE counseling is in fact harmful to minors and should therefore be prohibited. This is
reinforced on page 44 of the APA Report, which states that [b]ecause of the lack of empirical
research in this area, the conclusions must be viewed as tentative. Indeed, on page 11, the APA
Report admitted that recent research cannot provide conclusions regarding efficacy or safety.
19. On page 18, the APA Report implies that by striving to live a life consistent with their
religious values, people with same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity must deny their true
sexual selves. This further implies that individuals with sincerely-held religious beliefs that lead
them to seek a reduction or elimination of their unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity will not experience organismic wholeness, self-awareness, and mature development of
their personal identity. Those religious individuals who seek to live in conformity to their
religious values are assumed to experience a constriction of their true selves because of a
religiously imposed behavioral control. This false distinction, created by the APA Report,
ignores the desire of many clients to live in congruence with the fundamental tenets of their
sincerely-held religious and moral beliefs. For these individuals, the values they hold because of
their religious beliefs are viewed as guideposts and sources of inspiration that help guide them on
their pursuit of wholeness, and wholeness for these people can only be achieved by living in
congruence with their religious beliefs.
20. The APA Report seeks to diminish the beliefs of these individuals by suggesting that
religious beliefs should be reconstructed to align with their unwanted same-sex attractions,
behaviors, or identity rather than working to conform their sexual attractions, behaviors, or
identity to their religious beliefs. On pages 72-73, the APA Report recognizes that many clients
seek SOCE counseling because of their religious beliefs. On page 58, the APA Report then states
that therapy is a process of uncovering and deconstructing dominant worldviews and

assumptions with conflicted clients that enable them to redefine their attitudes toward their
spirituality and sexuality. The APA Report ignores the fact that many people desire to elevate
their religious beliefs above any unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and that
they seek counseling to assist them with this goal. The APA Report states that counseling for
individuals in this category should focus on refram[ing] the religious beliefs to focus on aspects
of faith that encourage love and acceptance of their child rather than on a religions
prohibitions.
21. The APA Reports position is based on the unproven assumption that homosexuality is
inborn and immutable. See Ex. C, Journal of Human Sexuality IV at 57 (noting that the APA
Report based its conclusions on an a priori assumption that homosexuality is inborn and
therefore immutable which is unsupported by the APAs own statements). The APAs position
dates back to the 1970s when on the basis of emerging scientific evidence and encouraged by
the social movement for ending sexual orientation discrimination, the American Psychological
Association and other professional organizations affirmed that homosexuality per se is not a
mental disorder. See APA Report at 11. This undermines the basis for A3371 and the APA
Reports conclusions because it reveals that the APAs change in position and its assumptions
that homosexuality is immutable were based on political and social pressure, not concrete
scientific evidence.
22. On page 30, the APA Report defines sexual orientation as an individuals patterns of
sexual, romantic, and affectional arousal and desire for other persons based on those persons
gender and sexual characteristics. The APA Report does not define sexual orientation as
enduring, which reveals that these definitions are not based on any universally recognized or
consistently applied scientific standard. Additionally, on page two, the APA Report recognized

that [s]ame-sex sexual attractions and behavior occur in the context of a variety of sexual
orientations and sexual orientation identities, and for some, sexual orientation identity (i.e.,
individual or group membership and affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or has an indefinite
outcome. Given the mental health professions inability to provide a concrete definition of
sexual orientation, there is potentially no limit to what could fall into its definition. The
vagueness in the understanding itself of what is encompassed by sexual orientation results in a
variety of understandings of its meaning, and includes pederasty, which is a homosexual
relationship between a young man and a pubescent boy outside his immediate family, or
pedophilia, or a host of other paraphilias or fetishes. This presents a difficult problem for a
licensed counselor tasked with complying with A3371 when the definition of sexual
orientation is fluid and vague. In any event, A3371 provides no definition of sexual
orientation, leaving counselors to guess as to the meaning intended by the statute.
23. Focusing on reframing an individuals religious beliefs is beyond the purview of
psychological counseling, and it ignores the most fundamental principle of the profession
namely, that the client has the right to self-determination. A3371 explicitly states that it is
relying on the conclusions of the APA Report and the proponents and drafters of A3371 focus
solely on the conclusions of it and other studies that are methodologically flawed. This reveals
the flaws of A3371 and specifically shows that it is aimed at reframing an individuals religious
perspectives deemed antiquated or discriminatory and imposing an ideology on those individuals
that do not wish to live in conformity with the view espoused by A3371 and the APA. The APA
Report also states on page 19 that prejudices directed at individuals because of their religious
beliefs and prejudice derived or justified by religion are harmful to individuals, society, and
international relations. (emphasis added). This further reveals that the APA Report and A3371

attempt to elevate sexual orientation above a persons sincere religious beliefs, and shows that
A3371 specifically targets those individuals that have religious beliefs opposed to
homosexuality.
24. The assertions of A3371 proponents are based on the unsubstantiated belief that same-sex
attractions, behaviors, or identity are the result of biology. The general position of A3371
proponents that sexual orientation is tied to physiological drives and biological systems that are
beyond the conscious choice contradicts the APAs own public-disseminated information
regarding sexual orientation and etiology, which says:
There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an
individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although
much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental,
social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged
that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any
particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex
roles. (APA, 2008b, p.2)

IMMEDIATE AND IRREPARABLE HARM CAUSED BY A3371
25. A3371 will cause immediate and irreparable harm to New Jersey licensed counselors and
clinics that focus on SOCE counseling, in that A3371 will prohibit them from continuing
beneficial and successful courses of treatment with minor clients and force licensed counselors to
stop speaking about SOCE treatment or risk losing their licenses. This law will immediately and
directly harm the counselors right to speak to and counsel clients in accordance with not only
the counselors religious and moral values, but with the clients religious and moral values. The
law will also immediately and directly infringe upon their clients right to receive information.
26. Moreover, A3371s operative commencement will be a shocking disturbance to minor
clients who are now in counseling. This counseling, which runs afoul of the prohibitions
contained in A3371, consists solely of verbal discussion between the counselors and the clients

as individuals, exploring the clients feelings and helping them align their feelings with their
religious and moral beliefs. After August 19, 2013, a minor client must be informed that all that
has been attempted is now illegal and unethical. There can be no further discussion regarding the
clients own therapeutic goals and the therapeutic relationship upon which those goals were
based to reduce or eliminate same-sex sexual attractions, behavior, or identity. The therapeutic
alliance between the clients and counselors - established at the cost of great time, monetary
expense, and trust - will be destroyed.
27. When New Jersey licensed counselors are forced to terminate their SOCE counseling
with minor patients, many of the minors will regress and will suffer adverse health consequences
stemming from an inability to address their goal of recognizing their heterosexual potential.
28. Some clients and their parents will have to seek out counselors who are not licensed and
therefore not subject to the dictates of A3371. They might continue to receive the SOCE
counseling they desire, but it will be administered by unlicensed professionals.
29. As a clinical psychologist, my experience and opinion inform me that it is important for
SOCE counseling to be engaged in by those therapists who have studied it and understand the
benefits and potential risks.
30. The practice of giving detailed information to minor clients and their parents satisfies the
ethical requirements that a counselor provide all of the information that is reasonable for the
client to make an informed decision concerning their individual course of treatment and that
facilitates the autonomous client decision-making process. A3371 will cause New Jersey
counselors to violate Section 3.10 of the American Psychological Associations Ethics Code
(APA Code) because they will be prohibited from even discussing a course of treatment,
SOCE, that is part of the information that they are ethically required to provide to their clients.

Counselors would also be prohibited from even referring a client who wants to discuss SOCE
therapy to a professional who can provide it.
31. Compliance with A3371 will force New Jersey counselors to violate the informed
consent mandates of Section 3.10 of the APA Code and probably also infringe ethical
requirement outlined in General Principle E of the APA Code that a counselor allow the patient
complete freedom to make a self-determined choice concerning his therapy. However, providing
clients with unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity with the treatment they desire
automatically constitutes and ethical violation under A3371.
32. Because of this impossible Catch-22, A3371 is certain to cause irreparable harm to the
practice of New Jersey counselors by putting their professional license in jeopardy no matter
how they proceed, and with no guidelines on how to resolve the conflict between A3371 and the
ethical codes.
33. A3371 will also cause New Jersey counselors to violate Section 3.06 of the APA Code by
causing them to enter into a relationship where their objectivity is called into question because
A3371 mandates that only one ideologyi.e., the States ideology condemning SOCEbe
shared in the counselors office.
34. A3371 also presents a significant problem for another element of SOCE practice and
provides no guidance on whether it prohibitions apply to it. Specifically, regarding any YouTube
and other videos on a counselors website and on other websites that specifically address the
issue of SOCE counseling. These videos have the potential to reach every minor in New Jersey.
A3371s language prohibits all efforts that seek to reduce or eliminate same-sex attractions,
behaviors, and identity, and it would seem that having videos on the Internet that advocate for
SOCE counseling and provide information about where an individual can receive it might be

perceived as an effort that seeks to reduce or eliminate same-sex attractions, behaviors, or
identity. Counselors do not know whether A3371 requires them to remove all of these videos
from their websites, and request that they be removed from others. Also, it is virtually impossible
to ensure that all such videos are removed, so if A3371 is found to apply to them, then a
counselor could inadvertently be subject to disciplinary proceedings because of the viewing of a
video that he or she thought had been removed from the Internet. Pamphlets and informative
brochures on the websites would likewise pose the same problems.
35. Additionally, it is completely uncertain about whether a simple referral would constitute
an effort seeking to reduce or eliminate same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity that would
violate A3371. Informing someone that such SOCE counseling is available at another location by
another individual not subject to A3371 seems like it could be a violation, but A3371 provides
no guidance on this matter, so a counselor is again faced with a dilemma of how to exercise his
or her professional judgment. In short, A3371 provides no guidance on the seemingly
innumerable applications of its prohibitions, which places counselors at constant risk of
unknowingly being subject to losing their professional licenses. Their clients will suffer as well,
since the counselors will not be able to confidentially counsel them on available options for their
undesired same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
VAGUENESS OF A3371 AND ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS OF PROPONENTS
33. The APA Report concluded that [s]ame-sex sexual attractions occur in the context of a
variety of sexual orientations and sexual orientation identities, and for some, sexual orientation
identity (i.e., individual or group membership and affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or has an
indefinite outcome. A3371 prohibits anyone from under any circumstances engaging in any
practice that seeks to reduce or eliminate same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity or

attempts to change sexual orientation. This prohibition is virtually impossible to comply with
because it is well understood in the mental health profession, and conceded by the APA Report,
that sexual orientation is difficult to define and encompasses a number of factors, including
behavior, practices, identity, and attractions. Given that this prohibition specifically deals with a
concept the APA Report concluded was fluid, counselors will ultimately be required to guess
at what practices would be prohibited under this bill. Since sexual orientation includes
pederasty and pedophilia, for example, a counselor counseling a client who has unwanted same-
sex sexual attractions toward other younger minors or acts on such attractions (behavior), will be
prohibited from a course of counseling designed to reduce or eliminate such attractions, behavior,
or identity. Furthermore, a counselor may not counsel a minor victim of an adult pederast or
pedophile that it is wrong to engage in sexual behavior with an adult of the same-sex.
34. There are multiple meanings of sexual orientation among licensed mental health
professionals. But how is one to define the gay adolescent? We might reasonably assume that
the best way to determine if a teen is gay is by what the teen says about himself. Proponents of
A3371 would agree that if a teen says he is gay, he is gay. But are we to believe him? What is
the credibility of a teenager who, according to the new law, cannot be believed if he says his
homosexual feelings do not represent his deepest sense of self, and he wants to change? How are
we to define a teenager who has same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity but does not believe
his sexual behavior makes him gay? He believes that deep down he is a heterosexual, but has
same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. Is it behavior or identity that defines his gayness?
Counselors look more deeply into the teenagers motivations and recognize that any self-label
may represent a variety of motivations that do not necessarily define his true sexual identity.
A3371 would prohibit this inquiry, if the counselors intent is to effect change in sexual

orientation, whatever that may be. Moreover, same-sex sexual attractions, behaviors, and
identity among minors often diminish or disappear spontaneously. It would be unethical for a
licensed counselor to tell the client who is experiencing temporary unwanted same-sex sexual
attractions, behaviors, or identity that such attractions, behavior, or identity is something the
client should embrace. In not helping the client eliminate or reduce such attractions, behavior, or
identity, the counselor might be pushing the client toward homosexuality, when in fact the client
is heterosexual and merely experiencing a temporary period of homosexual attractions.
35. Furthermore, A3371 permits education and information on SOCE but not the
practice of SOCE. When does education and information on SOCE not become the practice of
it? For example, a therapist may spend six months educating and informing the client of SOCE
and how it might apply to the client. Session after session the therapist may give examples of
how the clients behavior and feelings are explained by SOCE. What the client says about
himself may prompt the counselor to respond: Well, SOCE would explain your behavior as,
but ultimately, the counselor will have to guess as to whether the State of New Jersey would
consider such counsel a violation of A3371. At any rate, no matter what the counselor says, the
matter will be determined by how the client perceives what the counselor says. A counselor
educating about SOCE could likely be perceived as counseling to reduce or eliminate same-sex
sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity and thus be in violation of A3371.
36. Despite this lack of clarity in the law itself, proponents of A3371 have previously
attempted to establish an arbitrary and unrealistic distinction between practices of SOCE,
versus a counselors speech. In actual practice of psychotherapy, it is impossible to distinguish
practice of SOCE from speech. Psychotherapy is speech. The therapeutic relationship is
talking and communication; verbal and non-verbal communication is the essential element of the

therapeutic process. Thus, licensed counselors will ultimately be required to guess at whether
practice or speech would be prohibited under this law.
37. A3371 is not just about discussions of sexual orientation, but also about discussions
about a persons behavior that is incongruent with a persons religious or moral values. Licensed
counselors need the freedom to talk about a clients behavior in a manner that incorporates
discussions of the clients religious faith or values. Counselors will be forced to guess at whether
a discussion of behavior incongruent with ones beliefs and values is an effort to reduce or
eliminate unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity, which could include mannerisms
or speech under A3371. If a female client wanted to display more assertive male behavior or
speech inconsistent with her gender, counselors would be prohibited from encouraging such
behavior. The same is true when clients plead with a counselor to help them not to identify with
a particular sexual orientation. If counselors are prohibited from such discussions, then their
clients will face irreparable harm.
OTHER ERRONEOUS FACTUAL ASSUMPTIONS BY PROPONENTS OF A3371
38. Proponents of A3371 continually repeat the shibboleth that the mental health associations
no longer consider homosexuality a mental illness or disorder. That fact is irrelevant since it is
the clients distress with same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity and their right to seek
treatment to reduce that distress which is the issue. Counseling does not depend on the client
having a mental illness. Much of counseling involves stress that is not related to a mental illness.
Counseling a client does not send a message or presume that a client has a mental illness.
39. Proponents of A3371 assert that minors face family rejection based on their sexual
orientation, thereby creating especially serious health risks. Family rejection is not a necessary

outcome of SOCE. Rather, I and my colleagues who practice SOCE attempt to have parents
accept their teen irrespective of their sexual orientation outcome.
40. Proponents of A3371 have made assertions to the effect that there exists no empirical
evidence that providing any type of therapy in childhood can alter adult same-sex orientation.
This is irrelevant and not true. A treatment consisting solely of verbal counseling cannot be
outlawed because there is no evidence that it is effective.
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States and New Jersey that
the foregoing statements are true and correct.
Executed this ____ day of August, 2013

_____________________________
Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D.

CAMDEN DIVISION
(AACC),
Plaintiffs,
v.
Defendants.
Case No.
- --
DECLARATION OF DR. ERIC T. SCALISE
I, Dr. Eric T. Scalise, hereby declare as follows :
1. I am over the age of 18 and am the Vice President for Professional Development for the
American Association of Christian Counselors ("AACC"), one of the Plaintiffs in this action.
Declaration of Eric T. Scalise - 1
The statements in this Declaration are true and correct and if called upon to testify to them I
would and could do so competently.
2. I am submitting this Declaration In support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
3. I am a Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist and Licensed Professional Counselor in
the Commonwealth of Virginia and was a Licensed Marriage and Family Counselor in the State
of California for 23 years. I have a Ph.D. in Organizational Leadership from Regent University,
an Educational Specialist degree in Advanced Psychotherapy from The College of William and
Mary, a Master's of Education in Marriage and Family Counseling from The College of William
and Mary, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology from The College of William and Mary.
My curriculum vitae is attached to this declaration as Attachment A.
4. I am a clinical member of the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy
(AAMFT), and past clinical member of the American Counseling Association (ACA) and the
Virginia Counseling Association, as well as a charter clinical member of the AACC. I have
authored over 20 articles, as well as over 100 video workshops and other presentations.
5. The AACC was founded in 1989 and now has nearly 50,000 members throughout the
world, including in New Jersey.
6. The AACC's members represent the entire spectrum of care, from lay/pastoral counselors
to licensed mental health professionals. AACC's clinical members include Licensed Professional
Counselors, Licensed Mental Health Counselors, Licensed Marriage & Family Therapists,
Licensed Clinical Social Workers, Licensed Clinical Psychologists, Licensed Substance Abuse
Treatment Providers, Clinical Nurse Specialists, and Psychiatrists.
7. The Mission of the AACC is to equip this continuum of care with distinctively Christian
and clinically sound psycho-educational resources and services that address the whole person
and which help individuals move toward personal wholeness, interpersonal competence, mental
stability, and spiritual maturity.
8. The AACC seeks to encourage and support Christian counseling worldwide; disseminate
the delivery of professional and pastoral services.
9. The AACC's members' opinions and experience inform them that the professional
research literature and a number of peer-reviewed articles demonstrate positive support for the
efficacy of faith, spirituality, and religious values as they pertain to treatment outcomes. For
example, prominent researcher, Dr. Harold Koenig, Director of the Center for Spirituality,
Theology and Health at Duke University (2001), completed a systematic review of nearly 1,600
published health-related studies and concluded that the integration of a spiritual paradigm not
only demonstrates increased levels of self-esteem, social support, and life satisfaction, but
simultaneously reduces levels of anxiety, depression, loneliness, and suicide (Koenig, King, &
Carson, 2012, Handbook of Religion and Health, 2nd ed.).
10. The AACC's members' opinions and experience inform them that the research literature
supports the notion that when a client receives care within the confines of hislher basic
worldview and foundational value system-of which religious affiliation is a significant marker
for most-treatment outcomes are more positive (Fallot, 2001; Hage et aI, 2003; Hodge, 2006;
Koenig et aI., 2001; Larson, 2003).
11. The AACC's members follow the time-honored and foundational ethical value of client
self-determination. A3371 directly and significantly undermines what is considered as a
cornerstone principle in mental health counseling. This principle can be found in the language of
the ethical codes of notable professional member organizations such as the American
Psychological Association (AP A), the American Counseling Association (ACA), and the
American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists (AAMFT), to name a few.
12. The AACC's members support the position that every client seeking mental health
services has the inherent right to participate in counseling that is in alignment with hislher
religious beliefs and faith-based values, and furthermore, to have this right vigorously protected.
13. One of the ACA's divisions, the Association for Spiritual, Ethical, and Religious Values
in Counseling (ASERVIC), has developed written spiritual competencies to be incorporated into
treatment protocols. In reviewing the proceedings at the 2007 ACA national conference in
Detroit, Michigan, ASERVIC hosted a panel discussion of educators and clinicians. These
individuals were intentionally identified as being nationally recognized for their expertise in
teaching and research in the area of spirituality in counseling. The following are eight of the
competencies that have particular relevance to the discussion of the effects of A3 3 71 :
Competency #2 - The professional counselor recognizes that the client's beliefs
(or absence of beliefs) about spirituality and/or religion are central to his or her
worldview and can influence psychosocial functioning.
Competency #5 - The professional counselor can identify the limits of his or her
understanding of the client's spiritual andlor religious perspective and is
acquainted with religious and spiritual resources, including leaders, who can be
avenues for consultation and to whom the counselor can refer.
Competency #6 - The professional counselor can identify limits of herlhis
understanding of a client's religious or spiritual expression, and demonstrate
appropriate referral skills and generate possible referral sources.
Competency #7 - The professional counselor responds to client communications
about spirituality and/or religion with acceptance and sensitivity.
Competency #8 - The professional counselor uses spiritual and/or religious
concepts that are consistent with the client's spiritual and/or religious perspectives
and that are acceptable to the client.
Competency #9 - The professional counselor can recognize spiritual and/or
religious themes in client communication and is able to address these with the
client when they are therapeutically relevant.
Competency #12 - The professional counselor sets goals with the client that are
consistent with the client's spiritual and/or religious perspectives.
Competency #13 - The professional counselor is able to a) modify therapeutic
techniques to include a client's spiritual and/or religious perspectives, and b)
utilize spiritual and/or religious practices as techniques when appropriate and
acceptable to a client's viewpoint.
14. The AACC's members' opinions and experience inform them-as evidenced in the
language of the above listed Competencies, especially #8 and #12-that a client's spiritual and
religious values are indeed valid and reasonable determinants for the focus and direction of
counseling.
15. Many AACC members do not routinely offer SOCE counseling or rarely do, because
they do not consider themselves to be competent by virtue of education, training, and experience
regarding these related issues. Nevertheless, they will still likely encounter clients, including
minor clients, within their other areas of specialty who are facing unwanted same-sex sexual
attraction, behavior, or identity. These members are not inherently versed in the research
literature or SOCE as are other professionals who may regularly counsel in this area.
Nevertheless, as counselors trained to work in accordance with a client's values, beliefs, and
right to self-determination, they may consequently address "sexual orientation" as defined herein,
but will not necessarily understand the definition or tenns or reach of A3371. When these
members engage a client regarding either attraction, behavior, identity or any area of gender
expression (including mannerisms or speech), they wi11likely violate the law and be disciplined
under A3371.
16. A3371 places prospective clients in an untenable double bind when receiving sexual
orientation change efforts ("SOCE") counseling, especially when their religious values may
infonn and direct their behavior, expressions, and identity in a manner contrary to same-sex
attractions. Furthennore, A3371 may, in fact, represent actual hann to the client because it does
not allow the licensed treating practitioner to address these competing value systems, leaving the
client with no means to process the potential inner conflict.
17. While acknowledging the current controversy over the implementation of SOCE, the
general lack of conclusive research in this area, and the legitimate need for adolescents to receive
competent care when addressing issues pertaining to sexual orientation, AACC's members'
know that A3371 moves far beyond its original intent to protect minor clients and represents a
reckless infringement on the religious liberties of anyone needing counseling in this area.
18. When a client's faith values may be in conflict with other cultural values, especially as
they may pertain to the language found in A3371, that ultimately the client-and in the case of a
minor, his/her parent or legal guardian-has the moral and ethical right to participate in and
detennine the appropriate course of care, including alignment with hislher relevant religious
beliefs.
19. A3371 unfairly and unnecessarily discriminates against the religious liberties of the client
and represents an intrusive and potentially damaging dynamic regarding the delivery of care.
20. Many AACC members do not practice SOCE counseling exclusively, or in some cases, at
all. Nevertheless, these counselors will be subject to the same prohibitions that experts in sexual
orientation counseling face. The AP A Task Force Report revealed that not even the experts in
this area universally agree on a definition of sexual orientation. The Task Force Report
concluded that "[s]ame-sex sexual attractions occur in the context of a variety of sexual
orientations and sexual orientation identities, and for some, sexual orientation identity (i.e.,
individual or group membership and affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or has an indefinite
outcome." This places a tremendous burden on AACC members, who though lacking expertise
in this field, are still at risk of loss of their professional license when a minor client raises the
issue of unwanted same-sex attractions, behavior or identity in a counseling session that was not
originally understood to be prohibited counseling. These AACC members will be left to
speculate as to exactly what counsel is prohibited by A3371, as well as the definition of sexual
orientation and how to apply A3371 to any number of questions that arise when minor clients
clearly choose for their attractions, behaviors, or identity to conform to their religious or moral
values despite any unwanted sexual attractions, behaviors, or identity.
21. A3 3 71 is not just about discussions of sexual orientation, but also those pertaining to a
person's behavior that may be incongruent with his or her religious or moral values. Mental
health professionals need the freedom to explore a client's behavior in a manner that incorporates
discussions of the client's religious faith or values. AACC members will be forced to speculate
as to whether the very discussion of client behavior, even though it may be incongruent with
one's beliefs and values, would be considered an effort to reduce or eliminate unwanted same-
sex attractions, behaviors, or identity. The same is true when minor clients plead with a
counselor to help them not to identify with a particular sexual orientation. If AACC members are
prohibited from such discussions, then counselors and their minor clients will face irreparable
hann. A3.3.71 restricts. a mental health provider. from freely. .engaging with a minor .client on this.
subject, regardless of any emotional or psychological duress the client may be experiencing due
to the conflict of values, and therefore creates an unacceptable therapeutic double-bind for the
client.
I declare 1J.!lder pep.a1ty 9f of Qf
the foregoing statements are true and accurate.
Executed thisao..\y of August, 2013.

Eric T. Scalise, Ph.D.
.. _ ... , . . .... . _ .. ... _ _ _ _ . . .... _ . " . w __ ' ... . .. ... . ... . . _ ....... , ' __ _ ............. _ .. __ ...... ' ______ ... , _ .,. .. _ . ..... .... _ - __ ' .......... __ .. , .. .......... .... .... -- _ .. __ . p. ........ _ __ ... _ ... _ ._ .... , . _ "
JOHN J. HOFFMAN
Acting Attorney General of New Jersey
R.J. Hughes Justice Complex
P.O. Box 112
Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0112
Attorney for Defendants

By: Susan M. Scott
Deputy Attorney General
(609) 777-3410
susan.scott@dol.lps.state.nj.us

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
______________________________
:
TARA KING, ED.D., et al., : HON. FREDA L. WOLFSON, U.S.D.J.
:
Plaintiffs, : Civil Action No. 13-05038 (FLW-LHG)
:
v. :
:
CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE, :
Governor of the State of New Jersey, : NOTICE OF CROSS-MOTION
et al., : FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
: PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 56
Defendants. :
______________________________ :

To: Demetrios K. Stratis, Esquire
Law Office of Demetrios K. Stratis, LLC
10-04 River Road
Fair Lawn, NJ 07410
Counsel for Plaintiff

Andrew Bayer, Esquire
Gluck Walrath, LLP
428 Riverview Plaza
Trenton, NJ 08611
Counsel for Movant-Intervenor
HONORABLE JUDGE:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 1, 2013, John J. Hoffman, Acting
Attorney General of New Jersey, by Susan M. Scott, Deputy Attorney General, on
behalf of Defendants, shall cross-move before the Honorable Freda L. Wolfson,
U.S.D.J., in the United States Court House, Trenton, New Jersey, for an Order
granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned shall rely on the attached
Brief, Statement of Material Facts and Declaration of Dr. Jack Drescher in support
of the cross-motion.
It is respectfully requested that the Court hold oral argument.
A proposed form of Order is attached hereto.
JOHN J. HOFFMAN
ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY

By: s/Susan M. Scott
Susan M. Scott
Deputy Attorney General

Dated: September 13, 2013


13-4429 #39

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

13-4429 #39

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE NO.

You might also like