Supreme Court decision has potential to impact pro-life outreach

Pro-life groups are raising concerns about the potentially far-reaching implications of a Supreme Court case regarding a Colorado state law attempting to regulate Christian counselors' speech in therapy rooms. 

Key Takeaways:

• Colorado's law bans licensed counselors from offering talk therapy to clients interested in receiving help with unwanted gender dysphoria. The state requires that counselors only 'affirm' someone in the gender not aligned with their biological sex.

• Pro-life groups are concerned that if Colorado's 'conversion therapy' ban is upheld, government-required speech could eventually be forced upon pro-life groups like pregnancy resource centers.

• Heartbeat International stated its concern that state law has the potential to "alter[] the content of the pregnancy resource center’s speech by compelling workers to discuss pro-abortion policies they oppose."

On October 7, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments presented in Chiles v. Salazar, a case challenging Colorado’s attempt to prohibit conversations between counselors and minor patients who voluntarily seek talk-therapy treatment for gender dysphoria hoping, to become comfortable with their biological sex. Instead, the law disallows counselors from advising clients in any direction other than 'affirming' the person in the gender identity that is not aligned with their biological sex.

Background: 

First passed in 2019, Colorado’s ‘conversion therapy’ ban includes potential fines of up to $5,000 per violation along with potential suspension or outright revocation of licensing. To date, there have been no reports of anyone penalized for violating the ban.

According to Axios, 24 states have banned so-called ‘conversion therapy’ and five have implemented partial bans, which could be impacted by the Court's decision that is expected in June 2026.

The Details:

Representing licensed Christian counselor Kaley Chiles, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) chief legal counsel Jim Campbell states that Colorado’s ban on ‘conversion therapy’ harms minors by “denying them voluntary conversations they seek while allowing state-preferred counseling that promotes a gender transition,” which Campbell asserts “often leads to dangerous and life-altering drugs and procedures.”

During oral arguments, ADF warned that the case could have widespread implications, arguing, “States could ban counseling discouraging divorce or abortion,” effectively turning licensed counselors “into mouthpieces for the government.”  

Heartbeat International filed an amicus brief in support of Chiles, stressing concerns over states' efforts to “... restrict professional speech merely because it is adjacent to medical practice." Heartbeat stressed (p. 1):

If states are allowed to relabel speech as professional conduct and restrict it on that basis, states will predictably aim similar laws at pregnancy resource centers. Such laws are likely to force pregnancy resource centers to dilute their life-affirming message, or otherwise “alter[] the content of [their] speech.

Heartbeat International further argues that ‘conversion therapy’ bans could result in abortion groups and states using the law to force "pregnancy resource center workers, as part of an ethical or professional code (p. 8)...

… to provide both life-affirming advice and resources on abortions or risk professional discipline by a state regulatory board… altering the content of the pregnancy resource center’s speech by compelling workers to discuss pro-abortion policies they oppose.

The Ethics & Public Policy Center (EPPC) also filed an amicus brief in support of Chiles, asserting that ‘conversion therapy’ bans “...effectively mandate[] a gender-affirmation-only approach and den[y] effective talk therapy to minors seeking psychological help for identity-related distress and who desire to explore becoming more comfortable with their bodies.” (p. 5)

The American Association of Christian Counselors' amicus brief cites concerns over the “...troubling precedent that allows the government to ban anything “other than the state-approved opinion,” further citing concern of government attacks on religious beliefs for both patients and counselors. The Association stated (p. 4): 

By barring discussions based on the client's religious beliefs, the statute denigrates the client’s religious identity and restricts therapeutic religious speech. In effect, the lower court elevated sexual and gender identities over religious identities. Under this reasoning, even if the client earnestly wants help to live out his or her faith, the statute prohibits mental health professionals from using pure talk therapy consistent with the client’s religious beliefs.

The James Dobson Family Institute echoed concerns of religious censorship, stating (p. 3): 

Colorado law bars licensed counselors from engaging in talk therapy based on Biblical truth… This heavy-handed government censorship prevents parents and their children from learning about the dangerous consequences of immoral choices.

Why It Matters:

The Colorado state law banning ‘conversion therapy’ is based on the idea that homosexuality and transgenderism are ‘innate’ (a theory based on the premise that children are sexual from birth) which Colorado’s Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson alluded to multiple times during oral arguments.

Stevenson also pointed out that the state’s claims are focused on healthcare providers that are “under fiduciary duties to act in that patient’s best interest… subject to malpractice liability,” yet ignored the multitude of reports of harm done by "gender-affirming practices and procedures.   

Notably, Live Action News recently reported on the Federal Trade Commission’s intent to investigate allegations of deceptive practices regarding ‘transgender affirming care’ for minors and adults by medical establishments such as Planned Parenthood.

Several detransitioners, like Chloe Cole, have shared in a lawsuit how they experienced great physical and emotional harms from healthcare professionals. Cole says these individuals "deliberately and maliciously misled” her and her parents, which she claims destroyed her childhood. 

Solicitor General Stevenson, however, claims that evidence of the effectiveness of ‘conversion therapy' in assisting someone struggling with gender dysphoria does not exist. Yet Colorado’s legal argument outright ignores evidence presented by groups like the Ruth Institute, the EPPC, and testimony provided by medical professionals in the National Taskforce for Therapy Equality during initial hearing for the bill in the Colorado Legislature – each of which divulged the numerous flaws in the studies Stevenson cites, while providing ample studies to the contrary. 

The Bottom Line:

Detransitioners like Cole and others challenge the pseudo-scientific narratives that claim transgenderism is immutable, and consequently challenge the disturbing ideology that children are sexual beings from birth. This idea has been used to indoctrinate students in K-12 education since Alfred Kinsey and his 'research' obtained from pedophilic rapists shaped the sexual revolution.

Scientific advancements have shown distinct male and female chromosomes are evident in every person’s DNA, and biology and embryology show us that the preborn child in the womb is very much human and not just a 'clump of cells.' These are scientific facts.

Psychiatrist and author, Dr. Miriam Grossman notes this in her book, “You’re Teaching My Child What?” stating, “There are distinct male and female blueprints created from the moment of conception” (p. 164), which no surgery, nor hormones, nor an ideology rooted in something other than reality could ever change. 

Yet, if Christian professionals like Kaley Chiles are silenced for helping people using methods based on their moral convictions, scientific fact, and religious beliefs contrary to questionable mainstream narratives dictating current policy, the state-mandated censorship is certain to spread unabated.