The Supreme Court said Monday it will hear a First Amendment challenge by a Christian counselor against a Colorado law banning conversion therapy on minors aimed at changing their gender identity or sexual orientation.

The news comes after the nation's highest court previously declined to take up a similar challenge in 2023 against Washington's law banning conversion therapy on children. Colorado and Washington are among 23 states that ban conversion therapy on minors, according to the Movement Advancement Project, which tracks LGBTQ+-related laws.

Since his return to office, President Donald Trump has ratcheted up his targeting of LGBTQ+ Americans, issuing a series of executive orders cracking down on gender-affirming care, banning transgender people from military service, wiping out diversity, equity and inclusion programs in the federal government and more.

Many LGBTQ+ organizations and civil rights groups have filed legal challenges against the implementation of those executive orders, including some in Washington state.

The Colorado case the Supreme Court agreed to hear began after Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor, sued Colorado in 2022 to challenge the constitutionality of the state's 2019 law. A federal judge refused to block the enforcement of Colorado's law. Chiles appealed, and the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's decision.

Her legal argument against Colorado's conversion therapy ban for minors is virtually identical to the one previously used against Washington's law: That the state law violates her right to free speech and infringes on her free exercise of religion.

What is conversion therapy?

Conversion therapy, generally defined as treatment aimed at changing a person's sexual orientation or gender identity, is widely discredited in the medical community.

Since 1998, the American Psychiatric Association has opposed conversion therapy that is based on the assumption that homosexuality is a mental disorder or that patients should change their sexual orientation. In 2018, the group updated its position to encourage "psychotherapies which affirm individuals' sexual orientations and gender identities." The American Medical Association also opposes conversion therapy.

A United Nations expert on sexual orientation and gender identity said in 2020 that depending on its severity or the suffering it inflicts, the practice "may amount to torture."

The Trevor Project, a national suicide prevention organization for LGBTQ+ youth, identified more than 1,300 conversion therapy practitioners across 48 U.S. states and the District of Columbia in 2023.

Research has found conversion therapy among LGBTQ+ youth is correlated with higher rates of depression, anxiety, substance abuse and suicide attempts.

A 2020 study found LGBTQ+ youth who underwent conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to report having attempted suicide and more than 2.5 times as likely to report multiple suicide attempts in the past year.

How do Colorado and Washington's bans compare?

Both states prohibit conversion therapy on patients under 18 years old. The two laws use similar language, in some cases with only minor word differences.

Colorado's law defines conversion therapy as "any practice or treatment by a licensed physician specializing in the practice of psychiatry that attempts or purports to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity."

Washington's law defines it as "a regime that seeks to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity."

Colorado's law states conversion therapy includes "efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex." The Washington law uses nearly identical language, but pluralizes "attraction".

Both laws state conversation therapy does not include counseling that provides acceptance, support or the facilitation of a client's coping or identity exploration.

Washington's law notes it does not apply to speech or religious practices that don't constitute performing conversion therapy.

Neither law targets conversion therapy for adults.

What happened with the challenge against Washington's ban?

Washington passed its ban on licensed therapists using conversion therapy on minors in 2018.

In May 2021, Brian Tingley, a licensed family and marriage counselor, challenged the Washington state law. A few months later, a federal judge dismissed Tingley's case, ruling the law does not infringe on licensed health professionals' First Amendment rights, but appropriately regulates a form of "unprofessional conduct."

Brian Tingley appealed, and a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's ruling against Tingley, writing "States do not lose the power to regulate the safety of medical treatments performed under the authority of a state license merely because those treatments are implemented through speech rather than through scalpel."

The Supreme Court in December 2023 refused to take up the case. At the time, three of the court's nine justices — Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito — said the case warranted review. For the court to take on a case, at least four justices must vote to accept it.

Prior to the Washington case, a 2020 ruling by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found city bans on conversion therapy for minors were unconstitutional. The 9th Circuit's ruling created a "circuit split," or conflicting decisions on the same issues by different federal courts, that merited resolving, Thomas wrote in his dissent.

Who's challenging bans on conversion therapy?

Chiles is represented by the same law firm that represented Tingley: Alliance Defending Freedom.

The conservative Christian law firm and advocacy group that has pursued a litany of legal cases opposing same-sex marriage, transgender rights, insurance coverage for contraception, abortion access and more.

The group, which crafted Mississippi's abortion ban that paved the way for the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, has continued to litigate abortion-related issues. The firm represented a Kirkland-based Pentecostal church opposed to a state law requiring employer-sponsored health care plans covering maternity care to also cover abortions, which recently lost its legal battle.

The firm is also known for a number of Supreme Court wins, including its successful defense of a Colorado web designer who didn't want to create websites celebrating same-sex weddings and a Colorado baker who didn't want to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

What comes next?

The case will be heard by the Supreme Court in its next term, which starts in October, with a decision expected in summer 2026.

©2025 The Seattle Times. Visit seattletimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.