{"id":449,"date":"2025-03-12T17:08:03","date_gmt":"2025-03-12T18:08:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/spanishliteratureintranslation.com\/?p=449"},"modified":"2025-03-18T19:28:39","modified_gmt":"2025-03-18T19:28:39","slug":"opinion-colorados-ban-on-conversion-therapy-will-likely-fall-at-the-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/spanishliteratureintranslation.com\/index.php\/2025\/03\/12\/opinion-colorados-ban-on-conversion-therapy-will-likely-fall-at-the-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Opinion: Colorado\u2019s ban on conversion therapy will likely fall at the Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"

Should politicians tell therapists what they can and cannot say to patients? This week the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review a case<\/a> involving Colorado\u2019s Minor Conversion Therapy Law. The law prohibits mental health professionals from challenging a minor client\u2019s sexual or gender identity. The counselor can challenge other beliefs and practices but not those.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m facing a serious challenge,\u201d said plaintiff Kaley Chiles, a Colorado Springs counselor. \u201cThis law silences diverse perspectives and interferes with my ability to serve my clients with integrity. Children today are struggling with complex issues, and they need space to explore their feelings and concerns. Unfortunately, Colorado\u2019s law pushes them toward harmful medical interventions like drugs and surgeries by prohibiting supportive conversations that could help them navigate their struggles in a healthier way.\u201d<\/p>\n

Twenty states have banned conversion therapy over the past decade since the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in Pickup v. Brown and Welch v. Brown. Those cases regarded the constitutionality of California Senate Bill 1172, which banned conversion therapy. The cases classified talk therapy treatments as conduct rather than speech. As conduct, the court ruled, speech can be regulated. These cases were not the last word, however. The Third, Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits have split on the issue and the case is ripe for the high court.<\/p>\n

The Eleventh Circuit, for example, ruled in Otto v. City of Boca Raton that county and city ordinances banning the therapy practice violated the First Amendment\u2019s free speech protections. The District Court ruled against the two therapists, but the Court of Appeals overturned the ruling on the grounds that content-based speech restrictions had to pass strict scrutiny. The government, the court ruled, cannot quash views and speech it considers unpopular. \u201cForbidding the government from choosing favored and disfavored messages is at the core of the First Amendment\u2019s free-speech guarantee,\u201d wrote the court.<\/p>\n

These cases are not only about free speech but pit opposing worldviews against each other.<\/p>\n

Some people believe that all gender expressions and sexual orientations are valid expressions of human sexuality. Others believe that human sexuality should be expressed within a male-female covenant and that male and female sexuality are immutable qualities determined by chromosomes present at the beginning of life.<\/p>\n