The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in favor of Colorado Christian counselor Kaley Chiles, determining that the state’s ban on so-called conversion therapy for minors overstepped constitutional limits on free speech.
The 8‑1 decision, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, emphasized that licensed professionals cannot have their counseling sessions restricted simply because their guidance reflects certain religious perspectives.
Colorado’s law, enacted in 2019, barred mental health counselors from engaging in any practice intended to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity, with penalties including fines of up to $5,000 and potential suspension of licenses.
Supporters argued the law protected children from harmful practices, while opponents maintained it restricted speech and prevented counselors from discussing sensitive topics in faith-informed ways.
Chiles, a licensed counselor and practicing Christian, challenged the law, asserting it limited her ability to speak openly with clients seeking guidance on sexual orientation or gender identity.
According to Reuters, lower courts sided with Colorado, characterizing the ban as regulating professional conduct rather than speech.
The Supreme Court reversed this interpretation, stating the law suppresses a particular viewpoint and must pass stricter First Amendment scrutiny.
Gorsuch noted that prevailing professional standards cannot define the limits of permissible speech and that medical consensus evolves over time.
Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor joined the majority with a note of caution, suggesting that carefully drafted state laws could still regulate counseling in ways consistent with constitutional protections.
Kagan highlighted inconsistencies in Colorado’s law, which allowed certain counseling approaches while prohibiting others, leaving it vulnerable to challenge.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, warning that the ruling could undermine states’ ability to protect minors and regulate healthcare, describing conversion therapy as “dangerous” and expressing concern for potential harm to children.
The Hill reported that Chiles was represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal organization, and received backing from groups including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and 20 Republican state attorneys general.
Opposing briefs came from organizations such as the Trevor Project, PFLAG, the American Psychological Association, nearly 200 Democratic members of Congress, and 20 Democratic state attorneys general.
The decision does not affect state authority over medical interventions like hormone therapy or surgery, which remain subject to regulation.
Last year, the Supreme Court upheld states’ power to restrict such gender-transition treatments for minors, maintaining a clear distinction between counseling speech and medical practice, according to Politico.
Legal analysts predict the ruling could have far-reaching effects in more than 20 states that enacted similar bans.
Counselors, faith-based professionals, and free speech advocates may challenge restrictive laws, prompting courts to reassess how First Amendment protections intersect with state regulation of mental health services.
For conservative Christian organizations, the ruling represents a landmark affirmation of religious expression in professional counseling.
It highlights the Court’s view that licensed counselors cannot be compelled to conform their guidance to government-preferred positions, and it reignites national debate over the balance between safeguarding minors and protecting constitutional freedoms.
WATCH:
