Colorado Politics reports that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case challenging Colorado’s 2019 law banning licensed mental-health professionals from engaging in so-called “conversion therapy” on minors.
The plaintiff, Kaley Chiles, is a licensed counselor and practicing Christian in Colorado Springs. She argues that the ban restricts her ability to speak freely with clients – especially children – about sexuality and gender identity from a biblical perspective. Chiles contends that the law forces her to censor or alter her counseling in order to avoid violating the statute.
Federal judges have so far upheld the law: in 2022, Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney declined to block it, ruling the state may regulate the professional conduct of licensed counselors. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed 2-1 last year, saying the ban targets conduct, not speech. Dissenting Judge Harris L. Hartz countered that the state was, in effect, regulating speech and questioned whether the “scientific consensus” against conversion therapy was as solid as claimed.
The case reaches the high court amid growing national tension over where professional regulation ends and First Amendment rights begin. The same Arizona-based Christian legal firm that litigated Masterpiece Cakeshop (2018) and 303 Creative (2023) is representing Chiles.
The Bullet Point Brief
- Case: Chiles v. Salazar challenges Colorado’s 2019 ban on “conversion therapy” for minors.
- Plaintiff: Kaley Chiles, Christian counselor in Colorado Springs.
- Claim: The ban unconstitutionally restricts her religiously informed counseling speech.
- Lower Courts: District Court and 10th Circuit both upheld the law as regulating conduct, not speech.
- Dissent: Judge Hartz argued the law censors ideas and raises First Amendment concerns.
- At Stake: How far states can go in dictating what licensed professionals may say to clients.
My Bottom Line
This case isn’t just about one counselor or one therapy method – it’s about whether the State of Colorado has the power to dictate which ideas are legal to say in a counseling office.
Kaley Chiles isn’t accused of shocking kids, using chemicals, or engaging in any of the abusive “conversion” tactics that made national headlines decades ago. Her “crime” is talking – speaking from her faith about sexuality with minors who come to her voluntarily for Christian counseling. And yet, under Colorado’s 2019 law, even a conversation that affirms a child’s desire to align their feelings with their faith can be deemed illegal “conversion therapy.”
That’s a problem. The First Amendment doesn’t vanish when you earn a professional license. If the state can tell a counselor which viewpoints about gender or sexuality are allowed, what stops it from telling doctors what to say about abortion, or teachers what to say about history? This isn’t about protecting children – it’s about controlling thought.
The 10th Circuit’s majority brushed it off as a “regulation of conduct,” but counseling is speech. It’s words. It’s ideas. That’s the whole profession. When the state bans certain ideas, it isn’t regulating conduct – it’s regulating belief. Judge Hartz got it right: this law crosses the line.
The same firm that fought Colorado in Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative is back for round three, and for good reason. Once again, Colorado’s government is trying to police conscience under the guise of “consumer protection.” The Supreme Court now has the chance to reaffirm what should be obvious: government has no business deciding which moral or spiritual truths are permissible in private conversation.
If Colorado can silence one counselor because her views don’t fit the cultural narrative, it can silence anyone. Today it’s Kaley Chiles. Tomorrow it’s the next pastor, teacher, or parent who dares to speak against the prevailing orthodoxy.
This isn’t about therapy – it’s about liberty.
