Summary (tl;dr)

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Colorado's ban on conversion therapy for minors, when applied to talk therapy, infringes upon a counselor's First Amendment free speech rights, sending the case back to lower courts to apply a stricter legal standard. This decision is expected to impact similar bans across the country.

Essential Background

Conversion therapy is a pseudoscientific practice that attempts to alter an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity to align with heterosexual and cisgender norms. Major medical and mental health organizations widely discredit these practices, citing their ineffectiveness and potential to cause significant psychological harm, including increased rates of depression and suicide among LGBTQ+ youth. In response to these concerns, Colorado enacted its Minor Conversion Therapy Law in 2019, prohibiting licensed mental health professionals from performing conversion therapy on minors and imposing penalties for violations. More than 20 other U.S. states have similar legislative bans in place.

The Full Story

The Supreme Court recently issued an 8-1 decision in the case of Chiles v. Salazar, involving Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor from Colorado Springs. Chiles challenged Colorado's 2019 ban on conversion therapy for minors, arguing that it violated her First Amendment right to free speech by restricting her ability to provide religiously informed talk therapy to clients, including minors, who sought to reconcile their sexual orientation or gender identity with their faith.

Lower federal courts had previously upheld Colorado's ban, reasoning that it regulated professional conduct rather than speech and therefore did not require a stringent constitutional review. However, the Supreme Court reversed this, with Justice Neil Gorsuch writing for the majority that Colorado's law regulates speech based on viewpoint, which necessitates "strict scrutiny" under the First Amendment. Justice Gorsuch emphasized that the First Amendment serves as a "shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech." Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter, expressing concerns that the majority's decision could undermine states' authority to regulate medical care and lead to unsafe practices. The case has now been returned to the lower courts to be re-evaluated under the stricter legal standard.

Why It Matters

This Supreme Court ruling carries significant implications, potentially impacting similar conversion therapy bans in over two dozen states by requiring them to meet a higher legal threshold. LGBTQ+ advocates and numerous medical organizations express alarm, reiterating that conversion therapy is a harmful and discredited practice that puts vulnerable youth at risk. While some view the decision as a win for free speech and religious freedom, allowing counselors to offer diverse forms of religiously informed care, opponents contend it prioritizes anti-LGBTQ+ bias over the safety and well-being of children. The ruling does not validate conversion therapy as safe or effective, but rather focuses on the regulatory framework of such practices, leaving open avenues for addressing malpractice and consumer fraud.

Geographic Location

• Colorado Springs, El Paso County, Colorado, United States (location of counselor Kaley Chiles' practice and origin of lawsuit)
• Washington, D.C., District of Columbia, United States (location of the U.S. Supreme Court, where the case was decided)