Supreme Court to Hear Case on Conversion Therapy
After declining to hear a case on conversion therapy in 2023, the Supreme Court has decided to hear an identical one starting in October.
by Alyssa Steinsiek
Less than a year and a half ago the Supreme Court of the United States of America declined to hear a challenge to a Washington state law that bans conversion “therapy” for LGBTQ+ minors. Now, the Supreme Court has changed their mind, agreeing on Monday to hear another challenge to a similar law in Colorado when their next annual term starts in October.
In the 2023 Washington case, Tingley v. Ferguson, courts were asked to determine whether or not a law that prohibits certain conversations between counselors and their clients on grounds that the practices involved, i.e., attempting to dissuade LGBTQ+ clientele from pursuing their variant sexual orientation or gender identity, could be considered professional misconduct. While the defendant argued that this was a violation of their right to free speech and, in particular, targeted their religious freedoms as a Christian, it was ultimately found that regulating professional conduct did not violate free speech guarantees.
Now Kaley Chiles, represented by conservative Christian hate group Alliance Defending Freedom, is making the same argument in Colorado… and, come October, the Supreme Court will hear her case and determine whether or not bans against conversion therapy practiced on minors are constitutional.
A quick glance at the history of the case, Chiles v. Salazar, makes it very clear who’s rooting for Chiles. Many organizations have filed amicus briefs (recommendations to the court from supposed experts) in her defense, among them the Christian Medical and Dental Association, anti-abortion group Heartbeat International, the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors, and other biased religious organizations.
Chiles, a practicing Christian, believes that she can “help” her clients “accept the bodies that God has given them and find peace.” Why Chiles believes she has a God-given right to do harm to LGBTQ+ people is unclear, but to contrast, the Human Rights Campaign describes conversion therapy as “a range of dangerous and discredited practices that falsely claim to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.”
“Such practices have been rejected by every mainstream medical and mental health organization for decades,” they go on, “but due to continuing discrimination and societal bias against LGBTQ+ people, some practitioners continue to conduct conversion therapy. Minors are especially vulnerable, and conversion therapy can lead to depression, anxiety, drug use, homelessness, and suicide.”
In America, 27 states, as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and more than 100 municipalities have instituted bans on conversion therapy and its governmental funding. The vast majority of Americans believe that conversion therapy practices are harmful and should be illegal, making this a fairly straightforward issue that the Supreme Court should, in theory, have no difficulty determining the constitutionality of.
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson said, of the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case, “The Supreme Court’s decision to take up this case isn’t just about so-called 'conversion therapy'—it’s about whether extremists can use our courts to push their dangerous agenda, in an effort to erase LGBTQ+ people and gut protections that keep our kids safe. There’s no debate: so-called ‘conversion therapy’ is a dangerous practice, not therapy, and it has no place in our communities. These bans exist to protect LGBTQ+ children from harm—period.”
CEO of the Trevor Project, Jaymes Black, said, “Conversion therapy is not actual therapy. It is a harmful, debunked practice that has been shown to more than double an LGBTQ+ young person’s odds of attempting suicide in the past year. The Court should uphold laws that prohibit licensed professionals from using these dangerous practices—just as federal courts have done for more than a decade.”
With major medical associations, LGBTQ+ rights organizations, and most of America standing firmly against conversion therapy, the Supreme Court’s shouldn’t find themselves particularly conflicted on the matter. Unfortunately, Justices Alito, Kavanaugh, and Thomas’ dissent in Tingley v. Ferguson makes it unclear what the Supreme Court will decide now.
Expect to hear their decision on this sometime next year.
Alyssa Steinsiek is a trans woman journalist who reports on news relevant to the queer community and occasionally posts on BlueSky.
