Coloradans react to ruling against ban on conversion therapy

By Chris Woodward
The Center Square

Coloradans have mixed reactions to this week’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling against the state’s ban on conversion therapy for the LGBTQIA+ community.

At issue in Chiles v. Salazar is conversion therapy, or “talk therapy” as some have called it, for minors with unwanted same-sex attractions or gender identity issues.

Justices ruled 8-1 Tuesday that Colorado’s ban under a 2019 law violates the First Amendment rights of Christian counselor Kaley Chiles and sent the case back to a lower court.

In a video posted on X, Chiles expressed hope that this “win for free speech will fuel a greater pursuit of truth,” both among the professionals and in the counseling room.

“Our kids deserve it,” Chiles said alongside her attorneys at Alliance Defending Freedom. “The law I’m challenging harms kids and silences speech. Kids deserve real help affirming that their bodies are not a mistake and that they are wonderfully made.”

ADF lawyer Jake Warner said the law firm was “thrilled” with this week’s ruling for Chiles.

“She is a Christian counselor who counsels clients on a number of things, including gender identity, but Colorado passed a one-way censorship law that says that if clients come to her wanting help to change, to become comfortable with their bodies, that Kaylee cannot have those conversations with her clients,” Warner told The Center Square during an interview. “Instead, Colorado says she’s only allowed to push kids toward gender transition, which often leads to harmful drugs and procedures, so that’s obviously a very big First Amendment violation, and the U.S. Supreme Court said so earlier this week.”

Like Chiles, Warner said this ruling helps kids.

“Studies suggest that roughly 90% of kids who struggle with gender confusion will naturally become comfortable with their God-given sex if they’re not pushed toward transition,” said Warner.

The Interfaith Alliance of Colorado does not agree with the ruling.

In a press release, Interfaith called the decision “discouraging.” The organization also said that the state law in question, which was signed on May 31, 2019, reflects the “consensus of major medical organizations that conversion practices are harmful, ineffective, and unsupported” by scientific evidence.

“Therapists and other counselors don’t have a free pass to harm patients,” said Interfaith.

Human Rights Campaign, which has a chapter in Colorado, also opposed the ruling. By deciding in favor of Chiles, the court is allowing “licensed mental health practitioners to traumatize children,” HRC said in a statement. HRC did not respond to The Center Square’s request for an interview.

When asked about the case being sent back down, ADF’s Warner did not expect anything to change. Warner called it the beginning of the end.

“The case is still going on, but the way in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled is really the writing on the wall,” Warner said. “The court said that there is no difference. The First Amendment applies in the counseling room just like it applies everywhere else, and the state doesn’t have a free hand to censor viewpoints that it disagrees with.

“And the state has to at least overcome what courts call strict scrutiny, the highest test known to constitutional law,” he said. “Colorado has identified no evidence that’s even close to overcoming the standard that it has to satisfy.”

As Warner sees it, Colorado “freely admits” that it has identified no study that’s on point focusing on voluntary conversations between licensed counselors and willing minor clients.

“So, yeah, the case is going to keep going, but this is the beginning of the end for counseling censorship laws,” said Warner.

Meanwhile, Interfaith vowed to continue to work in coalition with faith leaders and communities, including the LGBTQIA+ and medical communities, to “ensure there are paths towards accountability, empowerment, and safety for those vulnerable to conversion therapy.”

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter in Chiles v. Salazar. In her opinion, Jackson, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, wrote that “treatment standards exist in America,” whether people like it or not.

Still, Colorado state Rep. Chris Richardson, whose district includes Adams, Arapahoe, Cheyenne, El Paso, Elbert, Kit Carson and Lincoln counties, said the Supreme Court got it right in ruling for Chiles.

“Regardless of the desires of the sponsors of Colorado House Bill 19-1129, it was not right to compel speech and force counselors to violate their religious convictions,” Richardson told The Center Square. “The Supreme Court got it right in Chiles v. Salazar, and I’m proud to have played a small role in supporting that outcome along with my colleagues who also signed the amicus brief.”

HB 19-1129 prohibits psychiatrists or mental health care providers from conversion therapy discussions with patients under age 18. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat who is an openly gay man, signed the bill into law in 2019.

When asked for comment, the governor’s office pointed The Center Square to Polis’ statement that Colorado is for everyone. Polis added that “conversion therapy does not work, can seriously harm youth, and Coloradans should beware before turning over their hard-earned money” to what Polis described as a scam.

“I am evaluating the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and working to figure out how to better protect LGBTQ youth and free speech in Colorado,” said Polis. “We are fighting for everyone’s right to be who you are in our Colorado for all.”

ADF, which represented Chiles, has been involved in several U.S. Supreme Court cases out of Colorado. Examples of clients include baker Jack Phillips and graphic designer Lorie Smith.

The Phillips case – known as Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission – involved the baker not wanting to create a same-sex wedding cake for religious reasons. At the time, Colorado required professionals to offer services to all customers. In 2018, Justices ruled 7-2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s actions in going after Phillips for his objections violated the free exercise of religion clause.

In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, justices ruled 6-3 in 2023 that the First Amendment prohibits Colorado from forcing Smith to create wedding websites for same-sex weddings. Smith wanted to design websites only for traditional, one-man, one-woman marriages.