Supreme Court Will Hear Challenge to Colorado Ban on ‘Conversion Therapy’ for Youth

A Christian counselor argues that the state law violates her First Amendment right to guide minors away from same-sex attraction.

The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington on Feb. 12, 2025. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court decided on March 10 to hear a First Amendment challenge to a Colorado law that prohibits counseling for minors that aims to turn patients away from same-sex attraction.

The petition in Chiles v. Salazar was granted in an unsigned order. No justices dissented. The court did not explain its decision.

“Conversion therapy is any emotional or physical therapy used to ‘cure’ or ‘repair’ a person’s attraction to the same sex, or their gender identity and expression,” according to WebMD, which says “medical and mental health experts have rejected conversion therapy practices” for decades.

Colorado’s Minor Conversion Therapy Law allows officials to take away the licenses of health care professionals who are determined to have offered conversion therapy to minors.

The petitioner, Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor, says the state law violates her constitutionally protected free speech rights. She argues that the law encourages young people to change their sexual orientation or gender identity away from the heterosexual norm and prohibits the provision of counseling for same-sex desires or identification with the opposite gender.

“A practicing Christian, Chiles believes that people flourish when they live consistently with God’s design, including their biological sex,” according to the petition filed on Nov. 8, 2024.

“Many of her clients seek her counsel precisely because they believe that their faith and their relationship with God establishes the foundation upon which to understand their identity and desires. But Colorado bans these consensual conversations based on the viewpoints they express,” the petition says.

Colorado’s “content- and viewpoint-based Counseling Restriction prohibits counseling conversations with minors that might encourage them to change their ‘sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions,’ while allowing conversations that provide ‘acceptance, support, and understanding for ... identity exploration and development, including ... assistance to a person undergoing gender transition.’”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit upheld the Colorado law “as a regulation of Chiles’s conduct, not speech.”

The ruling “deepened a circuit split between the Eleventh and Third Circuits, which do not treat counseling conversations as conduct, and the Ninth Circuit, which does,” the petition says.

Tenth Circuit Judge Veronica Rossman wrote for the majority in the appeal that studies and other evidence offered by Colorado officials show the therapy is harmful to minors, including increasing the possibility of suicide attempts.

Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing Chiles, hailed the Supreme Court’s decision to accept the case.

“Colorado has yet to grasp the fundamental truth that the government cannot censor free speech, especially when doing so harms counselors and the clients they are seeking to help. There is a growing consensus around the world that children experiencing gender dysphoria need love and an opportunity to talk through their feelings and their struggles,” Campbell said during a media teleconference after the court issued its new decision.

“The language of the statute is very clear in its one-sided censorship—it says that you can only counsel kids struggling with these issues in one direction.”

The case is expected to be heard in the Supreme Court’s next term, which begins in October.

Zachary Stieber contributed to this report.

This is a developing story and will be updated.