Overview
- During Oct. 7 oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, several justices questioned whether Colorado’s 2019 law is a viewpoint-based restriction on therapeutic conversations.
- Colorado’s solicitor general acknowledged the statute would bar a counselor from helping a voluntary minor client accept their biological sex, a concession justices said establishes the plaintiff’s standing.
- Government counsel noted the case record lacks studies specifically showing harm from non‑aversive talk therapy, even as major medical groups broadly condemn conversion practices as harmful.
- The law makes it professional misconduct for state‑licensed providers to try to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity while allowing acceptance‑based counseling.
- Some justices floated sending the case back for heightened First Amendment review, a move that could affect similar laws in more than 20 states, with a final ruling expected by June 2026.