Supreme Court ruling imperils California’s ban on conversion therapy
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a Colorado ban on conversion therapy violates the First Amendment, potentially invalidating other state laws like California’s that have long prohibited the practice as junk science.
Christian therapist Kaley Chiles and the anti-LGBTQ legal group Alliance Defending Freedom challenged Colorado’s 2019 ban on conversion therapy, a scientifically discredited practice claiming one’s sexual orientation or gender identity can be changed through talk therapy or other interventions.
Mainstream industry groups like the American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association say conversion therapy, also known as reparative therapy, is ineffective and scientifically baseless because sexual orientation and gender identity are not mental illnesses.
In an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court agreed with Chiles and the ADF’s argument that the Colorado ban was unconstitutional because it prevented her from counseling her clients on “efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions” while allowing “conversations that provide acceptance, support, and understanding for identity exploration and development, including assistance to a person undergoing gender transition.”
California was the first state to ban conversion therapy for minors in 2012 after Sen. Ted Lieu, now a congressman, led a successful effort to end what he called “quackery” and a form of “psychological child abuse.” Some 30 states now have laws regulating or banning the practice, according to Saint Louis University legal researchers.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only judge to dissent. She noted that the 2019 Colorado law only applied to minors: “Colorado’s law does not target or prohibit the expression of such views by anyone in any form — including by licensed healthcare providers in discussions with patients and their families. ... This means that, while Chiles can freely promote conversion therapy and vociferously decry the State’s prohibition, she cannot practice that therapy without being subject to professional discipline under Colorado law. “
The Supreme Court’s decision could imperil California’s ban because it has now taken the stance that government cannot regulate medical professionals’ viewpoints, according to Leslie Gielow Jacobs, a constitutional law expert at McGeorge School of Law.
“The principle is that....states can regulate flat-out false speech about health or health products,” Jacobs said. “But if the treatment here is itself talk (therapy), the court says, ‘no, the government can’t take a position on what’s false with regard to sexuality.’”
The decision is one of several in recent years where a majority of Supreme Court justices have sided with people claiming that efforts to expand protections for LGBTQ people or protect reproductive health care infringe upon their religious beliefs or freedom of speech. Earlier this month, the court paused a California law banning teachers from being forced to out students questioning their gender to their parents.
The state is currently battling the Trump administration over whether a decade-old state law protecting transgender athletes from discrimination violates federal anti-discrimination law.
Gov. Gavin Newsom blasted the Supreme Court justices’ ruling in online statements and noted that the ruling fell on Transgender Day of Visibility: “Conversion therapy is discredited junk science that inflicts harm on LGBTQ youth. The Supreme Court’s decision is disappointing and puts vulnerable kids at risk.”
Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, called attention to his recent legislation that would expand ex-conversion therapy victims’ ability to sue for malpractice: “In light of the Supreme Court’s horrific ruling invalidating bans on youth conversion therapy, we must create new strategies to protect LGBTQ youth. ...Survivors struggle with deep scars from this treatment for years and years, and they deserve the right to justice for what has been done to them.”
California Family Council president Jonathan Keller applauded the ruling, and said he expected a lawsuit soon challenging California’s conversion ban: “California’s attempt to dictate which viewpoints are allowed in the counseling room is ideological control, not protection.”
The 2019 Colorado law only applied to people under the age of 18 and did not apply to religious therapists like Chiles, who described herself as a “practicing Christian” who believes that “people flourish when they live consistently with God’s design, including their biological sex.”
The ADF has campaigned for years to negatively influence public opinion on protections for LGBTQ people, curb abortion access and force public school districts to fund religious charter schools.
In a video statement, a spokesperson called the ruling a victory for “free speech, families and common sense.”
“This ruling allows (Chiles’) ability to affirm biological reality, and conversations about gender and sexuality.”
This story was originally published March 31, 2026 at 1:03 PM.
