Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LetMyPeopleVote

(180,275 posts)
22. Deadline Legal Blog-Supreme Court sides with Christian counselor over Colorado on 'conversion therapy' for minors
Tue Mar 31, 2026, 03:07 PM
Mar 31

Medical groups warned that efforts to change sexual orientation and gender identity are illegitimate, ineffective and can be especially harmful to minors.

Deadline: Legal Blog - Supreme Court sides with Christian counselor over Colorado on ‘conversion therapy’ for minors

Medical groups warned that efforts to change sexual orientation and gender identity are illegitimate, ineffective and can be especially harmful to minors.

Lola Gayle (@lolagaylec.bsky.social) 2026-03-31T15:45:12.868Z

https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-conversion-therapy-colorado

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with a Christian counselor over Colorado in her challenge to the state’s ban on so-called conversion therapy for minors.

In an 8-1 ruling by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the court said that the state’s law, as applied to talk therapy provided by the counselor, Kaley Chiles, conflicts with First Amendment principles because it regulates speech based on viewpoint. Gorsuch wrote that the amendment “stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.”

About half the states in the country have banned or restricted the practice that aims to change a child’s sexual orientation or gender identity.....

Focusing in on Chiles’ claim, Gorsuch called the question before the court a narrow one. “Ms. Chiles does not question that Colorado’s law banning conversion therapy has some constitutionally sound applications,” the Trump appointee wrote. He noted that she doesn’t take issue with the state’s effort to prohibit physical interventions, but rather, she only provides talk therapy.

The problem, she argued, is that because the state’s law strikes at the heart of First Amendment speech protections, the lower courts didn’t provide rigorous enough scrutiny against the state in her legal challenge. ....

Upholding the district court’s ruling against Chiles, a divided appellate panel said the law only “incidentally” involves speech because counseling necessarily involves speech, but that the state isn’t restricting her constitutional expression.

“In other words, Ms. Chiles’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech is implicated under the MCTL [Minor Conversion Therapy Law], but it is not abridged,” the panel majority said, over dissent from a judge who said the majority’s “wordplay” in distinguishing speech from conduct posed “a serious threat to free speech.”

The panel majority noted that Chiles remained free to share her views on conversion therapy, sexual orientation and gender identity; that she can criticize Colorado for restricting her administration of conversion therapy; that she can refer clients to other service providers, like religious ministers; and that she can provide conversion therapy to adult clients.

I feel a little better. Talk therapy is not the same as the torture methods used in many forms of conversion therapy. Other forms of conversion therapy are still illegal.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Its junk science, all of it. Johonny Mar 31 #1
Suicide the final outcome? yankee87 Mar 31 #3
We need to fire all of Rupert Murdoch's clowns at every level. Initech Mar 31 #2
Weird ruling. Free speech behind a closed door medical treatment. bucolic_frolic Mar 31 #4
This message was self-deleted by its author Sympthsical Mar 31 #5
Was hate speech ever illegal? pcdb Mar 31 #12
There is not a "hate speech" exception to the First Amendment. tritsofme Apr 1 #28
It was pretty clear cut in this instance Sympthsical Mar 31 #6
The law protects abhorrent speech too EdmondDantes_ Mar 31 #7
Except they clearly don't believe that dsc Mar 31 #8
Perfect answer yankee87 Mar 31 #10
Sotomayor and Kagan didn't cocur with that decision Jose Garcia Mar 31 #13
No they didn't but Alito, Thomas, and Roberts surely did dsc Mar 31 #14
But they both did concur with the cons in this case. Celerity Mar 31 #15
Disagree yankee87 Mar 31 #11
There are a lot of terrible therapists in this world Sympthsical Mar 31 #19
Kagan touched on this in her concurrence Shrek Apr 1 #27
Therapy itself is questionable gulliver Mar 31 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author PeaceWave Mar 31 #17
I've no doubt you've met more than your share n/t Torchlight Mar 31 #23
Questionable at its best. Cerulean Southpaw Mar 31 #18
There are good and bad therapists Sympthsical Mar 31 #20
Your point about the importance of social support... gulliver Mar 31 #24
Absolutely. Those are the bad ones. Sympthsical Apr 1 #26
In every profession there are the good and bad luv2fly Mar 31 #25
I Wonder if this will Pave the Way... NEOH Mar 31 #16
Sad, but true yankee87 Mar 31 #21
Deadline Legal Blog-Supreme Court sides with Christian counselor over Colorado on 'conversion therapy' for minors LetMyPeopleVote Mar 31 #22
I am EXTREMELY disappointed that Justices Kagan and Sotomayor went along with this . . . markpkessinger Apr 1 #29
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»US Supreme Court rejects ...»Reply #22