Testimonials
Prayer Requests
homepage-top-logo-banner
ftfij-wide-banner-update

Supreme Court Strikes Down Colorado Counseling Ban, Dealing Major Blow to California’s Law

In a landmark 8-1 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Colorado’s ban on sexual orientation and gender identity talk therapy is unconstitutional. Justice Gorsuch wrote that laws restricting change counseling for minors violate the First Amendment’s protections on free speech.
 
In Chiles v. Salazar, the Court held that Colorado’s law “regulates speech based on viewpoint,” impermissibly allowing certain perspectives while censoring others. Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch emphasized that “the First Amendment stands as a bulwark against any effort to prescribe an orthodoxy of views,” warning that laws targeting disfavored ideas represent “an egregious assault” on free speech.
 
This ruling has immediate implications for California’s SB 1172, signed in 2012. This law, like Colorado’s, bans licensed counselors from engaging in talk therapy that helps minors reduce unwanted same-sex attraction or gender confusion and associated behaviors.
 
“Today’s decision is a major victory for free speech and for every American who believes the government has no place in private conversations between a counselor and a client,” said Jonathan Keller, President and CEO of the California Family Council. “California’s attempt to dictate which viewpoints are allowed in the counseling room is ideological control, not protection.”
 
At the heart of the Court’s decision is a simple but profound truth: speech does not lose its constitutional protection simply because it occurs in a therapeutic setting. As the Court noted, Counselor Kaley Chiles’s “speech does not become ‘conduct’ just because a government says so,” rejecting the idea that labeling conversations as “treatment” gives the state authority to censor them.
 
California Family Council leaders warn that laws like SB 1172 represent a dangerous form of government overreach, one that intrudes on deeply personal, confidential conversations about identity, religious belief, family, and human flourishing.
 
“Counseling bans are a deeply misguided attempt to regulate the way people pursue happiness,” said Keller. “It’s shameful for government censors to insert themselves into the middle of a private counseling session and decide which goals are allowed to be discussed.”
 
The Court also highlighted the broader danger of allowing government agents to dictate acceptable viewpoints, noting that history is filled with examples of authorities using speech regulations to “suppress minorities” and silence “unpopular ideas.”
 
“Not everyone experiencing same-sex attraction or gender incongruence wants to base their identity and behavior on these subjective feelings,” said Keller. “This Easter week, billions of Christians around the world will celebrate Jesus’ victory on the cross and His resurrection from death. Today’s ruling is a good reminder that true freedom comes from faith in Christ, not from government bureaucrats ‘protecting’ people from messages they disagree with.”   
 
This ruling sets a powerful precedent that most certainly dooms California’s own ban on change counseling. According to constitutional expert Dean Broyles, president of the National Center for Law and Policy, he expects a legal challenge soon. 
 
“Today’s 8-1 ruling in Chiles v. Salazar is a landmark decision highlighting our nation’s commitment to robust First Amendment rights,” Dean explained. “Colorado’s ban on change-allowing talk therapy for minors was patterned on and is nearly identical to California’s harmful 2012 ban.  If Colorado’s ban on voluntary non-aversive change-allowing talk therapy is an unconstitutional infringement on speech, so is California’s SB 1172.  As a constitutional attorney, if California doesn’t voluntarily repeal SB 1172, I look forward to a soon-to-be legal challenge that ends the unlawful ban in California.”
 
Loading...