Lawsuit filed regarding the TN counseling discrimination law

7/26/2019 Lawsuit filed regarding the TN counseling discrimination law

1/6

IN THE

CI.IANCERY

COURT

FOR

ANDERSON

GOUNTY,

TENNESSEE

BLEU

COPAS

and

CALEB

LA|ESK|.

Plaintiffs

VS.

BILL

HASLAM,

in

his

otficial

capacity

as

governor

of

the

State

of

Tennessee

and

the

STATE

OF

TENNESSEE.

J

co

cc

c--

z.

=.}

)

fd

t\.J

Defendants.

*6.

il

l,r

il,

rn

ili

'{

f'

X

Plaintiffs

Bleu Copas

and

Caleb Laieski,

by

and

through counsel,

pursuant to

.--.;

x,

i TFnn

Code

Ann'

$

29-14-103,

for

their

complaint

against

Bill

Haslam,

in

his official

:: *

Lr

L-lJ

I,r

i;cryacity

as

the

governor

of

Tennessee,

and

the

State

of Tennessee,

represent

the

following:

PARTIES

1'

Plaintiff

Bleu

Copas

( Mr.

Copas )

is

a

citizen

and resident

of Tennessee,

residing

in

Anderson

County,

Tennessee.

2.

Plaintiff

Caleb

Laieski ( Mr.

Laieski )

is

a

national

lesbian,

gay,

bi-sexual,

and

transgender

rights

activist

residing

in

Alexandria,

Virginia.

3.

Bill

Haslam

(the

Governor )

is the

governor

of the

State

of

Tennessee

and

is

sued

in his

official

capacity

as

the

governor

of

the

state

of

rennessee.

4'

The

State of

Tennessee

(the State )

is

a

recognized entity

which

is a state

in

the

United

States.

Page

1 of7


2/6

JURISDICTION

AND

VENUE

5.

This

Courl

has

subject

matter

jurisdiction

pursuant

to Tenn.

Code.

S

16-11-

102

and

Tenn.

Code

Ann,

g

16-1

1-103.

6'

This

Court

has

jurisdiction

over

the

Governor

in

that

he

serves

Anderson

County,

among

the

other

counties

in

the

State.

7

'

This

Court

has

jurisdiction

over

the

State

in

that

the

State

includes

Anderson

County,

Tennessee,

8.

Venue

is

proper

in

Anderson

County

pursuant

to Tenn.

Code

Ann.

g

2O-4-

101.

FACTS

9.

On

May

2,2016,

the

Governor

signed into

law

Senate

Bill 1sbo/House

Bill

1840,

Pub.

Ch.

926

(the

Statute ).

10.

The

Statute

provides

as

follows:

BE IT

ENACTED

BY

THE

GENERAL

ASSEMBLY

OF THE

STATE

OF

TENNESSEE:

sEcrloN

1.

Tennessee

code

Annotated,

Tiile

63,

chapter

22,

is amended

by

adding

the following

new

part:

a)

No

counselor

or therapist

providing

counseling

or

therapy

services

shall

be required

to counsel

or serve

a

client

as

to

goals,

outcomes,

or

behaviors

that

conflict

with

the

sincerely

held

principles

of

the

couns.elor

or

therapist; provided,

that

the

counselor

or therapist

coordinates

a

referral

of the

client

to

another

counselor

or therapist

who

will

provide

the

counseling

or therapy.

b)

The refusal

to

provide

counseling

or therapy

services

as described

in

subsection

(a)

shall

not

be

the

basis

for:

1)

A

civil

cause

of

action:

or

2)

Criminal

prosecution

Page

2of7


3/6

c)

For

purposes

of

this

section,

counseling

or

therapy

services,,

means

assisting

an

individual,

who

is

seeking

or

engageo

in

tt.'e

counseling

relationship

in

a

private

practice

setting,

in

a-manner

intended

to

facilitate

normal

human growth

and

development,

using

a

combination

of

mental

health

and

human

development

princifiles,

methods,

and

techniques,

to

achieve mental,

emotionalj

pnyiicat,

social,

moral,

educational,

spiritual,

or

career

development

and

adjustment

throughout

the

individual's

life

span

subsections

(a)

a1d

(b)

shall

not

apply

to

a

counselor

or

therapist

when

an

individual

seeking

or

undeigoing

counseling

is

in

imminent

danger

or

harming

themselves

or

others.

d)

SECTION

2.

Tennessee

Code

Annotated,

Section

63-22-110(bX3),

is

amended

by adding

the

following

ranguage

after

the

ranguage

board;',:

,

except that

a

violation

of

A.11.b

of

the 2014

American

Counseling

Association

Code

of

Ethics,

or

any

similar

or

successor

provisionl

shall

not

be

grounds

upon

which

the

board

shall

exercise

iis

powers

pursuant

to

subsection

(a);

provided,

however,

that

a

violation

of

A'11.b

shall

be

a

ground

forthe

board

to

exercise

these

powers

in

cases

involving

an

individual

seeking

or undergoing

counseling

where

the

individual

was

in

imminent

danger

of

harming

themselvei

or others;

SECTION

3.

This

act

shall

take

effect

upon

becoming

law,

the

public

welfare

requiring

it.

11'

The

purpose

of

the

Statute

is

to

void

1l

A.11,b

of

the

2014

American

Counseling

Association

Code

of

Ethics

(the Code

of Ethics ),

which

has

been

adopted

by the

State

of Tennessee

as

the

ethics

code

for Tennessee

counselors

and

therapists.

11A.11.b

of

the

Code

of

Ethics

reads

as

follows:

A.{1.b.

Values

Within

Termination

and

Referral

Counselors

refrain

from

referring prospective

and

current clients

based

solely

on the

counselor's

personally

held

values,

attitudes,

beliefs,

and

behaviors.

Counselors

respect

the

diversity

of

clients

and

seek

training

in

areas

in

which

they

are

at

risk

of imposing

their

values

onto

clients,

especially

when

the

counselorls

values

are

inconsistent

with

the

client's

goals

or are

discriminatory

in

nature.

Page

3 of 7


4/6

12'

The

American

Counseling

Association,

among

other

counseling

and

therapy groups,

opposed

the

statute

for

various

reasons,

including

that

the

statute

allows

for

discrimination

in

the

provision

of

counsering

and

therapy

services,

13'

Plaintiff

Mr'

copas

is

a

homosexual

man

who

seeks

a

ruling

that

the

statute

is

unconstitutional

under

both

the

Tennessee

and

United

states

constitutions.

14'

Plaintiff

Mr'

Laieski

is

a

homosexual

man

who

seeks

a

ruling

that

the

statute

is

unconstitutional

under

both

the

Tennessee

and

United

states

constitutions,

15'

There

is

a

logical

nexus

between

the

status

asserted

by

[the

plaintiffs]

and

the

claim sought

to

be adjudicated, and a significant degree of

contentiousness.l

16.

The

statute

is

a

matter

of

great

pubric

concern.

17

'

The

Statute

will

be

incapable

of

review

but

for

allowing

it

to be

challenged

in

this

case.

18'

Approximately

28%

of

people

in

in

the

United

States

in

201b

believed

that

gay

or

lesbian

relations

should

be

illegal.

Galtup

Pott

on

Gay

and

Lesbian

Rights,

http

://www. gall

u

p.

com

lpoll

1

6s 1

lgay-lesb

ia

n-rig

hts.

aspx.

19'

Approxim

ately

34o/o

of

people

in

the

United

States

in

2015

believed

that

gay

and

lesbian

relations

are

morally

wrong.

ld.

20'

In

its

initial

form,

the

Statute

made

specific

reference

only

to religious

beliefs'

lt is

well

known

that

most

anti-lesbian,

gay,

bi-sexual,

and

transgender

(,,LGBT,,)

individuals

are anti-LGBT

based

on

religious

beliefs.

21.

section

1

(a)

of

the

initiar

biil

provided,

in

pertinent

part:

No

counselor

or

therapist

providing

counseling

or

therapy

services

shall

be

required

to

counsel

or

serve

a

client

as

to

g6als,

outcomes,

or behaviors

1

Roe

v.

wade,

410

u.s.

119,

124,

93

s.ct.

70s,

z12,

3s

L.Ed.2d

147

,

160

(1g73),

Page

4

of7


5/6

that

conflict

with

a

sincerety

hetd

religious

hetief

of

the counselor

or

therapist.

. ..

(emphasis

added).

22'

ln

both

the

Health Committee

and

on

the

floor,

the

terms

diverse,,,,,lesbian,,,

gay,

and

lifestyle

were

used

in

debates

among

the

senators

and

representatives.

23'

LGBT

persons

were

the

target

of

the

Statute.

They

are

singled

out

for

discriminatory

treatment.

There

is

no

other

group

which

could

conceivably

be

the

target

of

the

Statute.

24'

The

effect

of

the

statute

is

to

give

counselors

and

therapists

an

open

door

to discriminate

against

people

of

cerlain

protected

classes,

specifically

LGBT

individuals

and

couples,

as clients

or

to

terminate

therapy

for

LGBT

individuals

and

couples.

THE

STATUTE

VIOLATES

ARTTCLE

Xt

S

S

OF

THE

TENNESSEE

CONST|TUT|ON

25'

Article

Xl,

S

8

of

the

Tennessee

Constitution

guarantees

that

persons

similarly

situated

shall

be

treated

alike.,,2

26'

The

Courts

in

Tennessee have treated

this

Class

Legislation

Clause

similar

to

the

Equal

Protection

Clause

in

the

14th

Amendment

to

the

United

States

Constitution.

27.

Mr.

Copas

and

Mr.

Laieski,

along

with

all

other

LGBT

individuals,

cannot

be

treated

differently

through

legislation

than

the

rest

of the

population.

28'

The

Statute

allows

for

just

that.

Under

the

Statute,

LGBT

individuals

are

treated

differently.

S.W.3d

248,

276

(Tenn.

2001

).

Page

5

of7

2

Citv

of

Chattanooga

v.

Davis,

54


6/6

SURETY

BOND

FOR

COSTS

The

undersigned

acknowledges

himself

as

surety

for

all

costs

of

this

action.

L. Edrfiston

EDMISTON

FOSTER

Page

7

of7

Documents

Lawsuit filed regarding the TN counseling discrimination law