Laws banning conversion therapy for minors follow recommendations by most professional health-care provider associations that such counseling can harm and traumatize young people. (Allison Robbert/The Washington Post)
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up a Christian therapist’s challenge to a state law barring “conversion therapy” that attempts to change a young person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
Kaley Chiles, who practices in Colorado, says the state law banning such treatment is unconstitutional and has forced her to deny counseling to potential clients who share her faith, in violation of her religious beliefs.
More than 20 states and the District of Columbia restrict mental health counseling that attempts to change a young person’s gender identity or sexual orientation. The laws followrecommendations by most professional health-care provider associations that such counseling can harm and traumatize young people.
The justices will review the case in the term that begins in October.
Tracking major Supreme Court decisions
(Miriam Martincic/For The Washington Post)
Here are the biggest cases before the Supreme Court this term. See which have been argued, which decided and why it matters.
End of carousel
Colorado Attorney General Philip J. Weiser (D) criticized conversion therapy as “unscientific and cruel” and defended the law as within the state’s power to set standards for mental health professionals.
“States have long regulated medical practices to protect patients from harmful professional conduct,” he said in a statement. “Colorado’s law protecting young people from unscientific and cruel gay conversion therapy practices is human, smart, and appropriate.”
In 2023, the Supreme Court refused to consider a challenge to a similar law in Washington State. It takes the votes of four justices to review a case, and that decision sparked dissent from three justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Brett M. Kavanaugh.
“There is fierce debate over how best to help minors with gender dysphoria,” Thomas wrote then.
The Supreme Court is separately deciding this term whether states can ban gender transition care for minors, such as hormones and puberty blockers.
In the conversion therapy case, the therapist is represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Christian legal organization behind many conservative victories at the court — including two recent past cases that are also from Colorado.
The group represented a Christian web designer from Colorado who won a ruling from the court that said she could turn away same-sex weddings clients and the Colorado baker who refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
Chiles specializes in counseling for trauma related to addiction and personality disorder, according to court filings, and more recently took an interest in specializing in areas such as gender dysphoria and sexuality. Jim Campbell, the ADF’s chief legal counsel, said Chiles has had to turn down multiple prospective clients because of the law.
In court filings, Chiles said clients with “same-sex attractions or gender identity confusion” who “prioritize their faith above their feelings are seeking to live a life consistent with their faith.”
Not being able to do so leads to “internal conflicts, depression, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders and so forth,” she said.
Chiles’s lawyers said her clients seek her out because they share her Christian worldview and faith-based values.
“The government has no business censoring private conversations between clients and counselors, nor should a counselor be used as a tool to impose the government’s biased views on her clients,” said Kristen Waggoner, the ADF’s president and general counsel said in a statement.
Since 2019, Colorado has prohibited mental health treatment for patients under 18 that attempts to change a client’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Health professionals who violate the law can have their licenses suspended or be fined as much as $5,000.
The provision has never been enforced, but in 2022, Chiles sued preemptively in federal court, seeking a declaration that Colorado’s law is unconstitutional and to prevent the state from enforcing it.
A district court judge upheld Colorado’s law, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit affirmed that ruling.
“By regulating which treatments Ms. Chiles may perform in her role as a licensed professional counselor, Colorado is not restricting Ms. Chiles’s freedom of expression,” the appeals court said.