Supreme Court Overturns Colorado's 'Conversion Therapy' Ban

The United States Supreme Court delivered a major setback to Colorado officials by ruling against the state's ban on "conversion therapy." The justices determined that the state law impermissibly regulates speech based on specific viewpoints.

The final decision was an 8-1 ruling, concluding that lower courts did not apply the necessary heightened scrutiny required under the First Amendment when reviewing the statute. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the sole justice to dissent from the majority opinion.

The Petitioner's First Amendment Claim

The case originated with a challenge brought by an individual, identified here as Chiles, who initiated the federal court case in 2022. Chiles contended that the state's prohibition on "conversion therapy" unlawfully censored her ability to communicate with families and children seeking her services.

Specifically, she argued the law prevented her from attempting to dissuade minors from altering their sexual orientations or gender identities. Both the federal district court and the subsequent appeals courts had previously rejected Chiles’s argument that the law infringed upon her First Amendment rights.

Legal Proceedings and Arguments

The Supreme Court agreed to hear Chiles’s appeal in March 2025. Oral arguments were subsequently heard during the first week of the Court's term in October 2025.

During these arguments, Chiles maintained that the law violated her fundamental free speech rights. Conversely, Colorado defended the legislation, asserting that it functioned purely as a regulation of healthcare practices.

The justices appeared skeptical of Colorado's defense of the law during the October 2025 oral arguments, foreshadowing the eventual ruling.

Context of Colorado Laws Before the High Court

This ruling continues a trend of Supreme Court scrutiny involving Colorado laws intended to protect LGBT rights over the last decade. Colorado has faced repeated challenges accusing its statutes of infringing upon personal freedoms.

The state has experienced a poor track record in recent high-profile cases before the Supreme Court. This includes prior losses involving Jack Phillips, who successfully challenged the state's attempt to compel him to bake a cake for a gay wedding, and a similar case involving Lorie Smith.