Supreme Court Poised to Undermine LGBTQ+ Protections in Dangerous Conversion Therapy Case
Published
- 3 min read
The Facts:
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appears ready to rule in favor of a Christian therapist challenging Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy for minors. The case centers on whether Colorado’s law represents permissible regulation of professional conduct or an unconstitutional infringement on free speech rights. Colorado’s statute prohibits mental health professionals from engaging in practices that attempt to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity, with violations carrying fines up to $5,000 and potential license suspension.
During oral arguments, Justice Samuel Alito suggested the law constitutes “blatant viewpoint discrimination,” while Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether the banned therapy actually causes harm. Colorado’s solicitor general countered that substantial evidence shows conversion therapy is ineffective and dangerous, causing harm by telling young people “there is something innate about yourself you can change” and then having them fail in that attempt.
The case involves Kaley Chiles, an evangelical Christian therapist represented by the conservative Alliance Defending Freedom, who claims the law prevents her from helping patients live “consistent with their faith.” Medical organizations have opposed conversion therapy since the late 1990s based on research showing its harmful effects. The court’s decision, expected by June, will affect similar laws in over 20 other states.
Opinion:
This case represents a terrifying assault on both scientific consensus and the well-being of vulnerable LGBTQ+ youth. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appears poised to prioritize religious ideology over medical expertise and child welfare, potentially unleashing a wave of psychological harm across the nation. Conversion therapy isn’t legitimate treatment - it’s psychological abuse disguised as therapy, and every major medical association has condemned it as dangerous and ineffective.
The framing of this as a free speech issue is particularly insidious. When licensed professionals provide services that cause demonstrable harm, states have both the right and responsibility to regulate that conduct. This isn’t about silencing religious views - it’s about preventing licensed therapists from inflicting trauma on children under the guise of professional treatment. The fact that Colorado’s law includes a religious exemption for ministry practices shows the state has already balanced these interests appropriately.
What’s most alarming is the court’s apparent willingness to disregard overwhelming medical evidence in favor of ideological preferences. If the Supreme Court strikes down this protection, they’ll be responsible for the increased depression, suicide risk, and psychological damage that will inevitably follow. We must stand firm against any attempt to legitimize practices that tell LGBTQ+ youth they’re broken and need fixing. Every child deserves to grow up in a world that celebrates their identity rather than trying to erase it.