NEWSAR
Multi-perspective news intelligence
SRCAssociated Press (AP)
LANGEN
LEANCenter
WORDS747
ENT11
TUE · 2026-03-31 · 20:23 GMTBRIEF NSR-2026-0331-46095
News/US Supreme Court rejects Colorado ban on/Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion ther…
NSR-2026-0331-46095News Report·EN·Legal & Judicial

Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ+ kids

The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 against a Colorado law banning "conversion therapy" for LGBTQ+ minors. The court sided with a Christian counselor who argued the law violated her First Amendment rights.

By  LINDSAY WHITEHURSTAssociated Press (AP)Filed 2026-03-31 · 20:23 GMTLean · CenterRead · 3 min
Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ+ kids
Associated Press (AP)FIG 01
Reading time
3min
Word count
747words
Sources cited
7cited
Entities identified
11entities
Quality score
100%
§ 01

Briefing Summary

AI-generated
NEWSAR · AI

The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 against a Colorado law banning "conversion therapy" for LGBTQ+ minors. The court sided with a Christian counselor who argued the law violated her First Amendment rights. Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, stated the law censored speech based on viewpoint, sending the case back to a lower court for review. Justices Kagan and Sotomayor agreed that the state cannot suppress one side of a debate while aiding the other. Justice Jackson dissented, arguing states should regulate healthcare, even with incidental speech restrictions. The counselor, supported by the Trump administration, argued the ban prevented her from offering voluntary, faith-based therapy.

Confidence 0.90Sources 7Claims 5Entities 11
§ 02

Article analysis

Model · rule-based
Framing
Legal & Judicial
Human Rights
Tone
Measured
AI-assessed
CalmNeutralAlarmist
Factuality
0.80 / 1.00
Factual
LowHigh
Sources cited
7
Well sourced
FewMany
§ 03

Key claims

5 extracted
01

Counselors walking alongside these young people shouldn’t be limited to promoting state-approved goals like gender transition.

quoteCounselor Kaley Chiles
Confidence
1.00
02

The decision “opens a dangerous can of worms” that “threatens to impair states’ ability to regulate the provision of medical care.

quoteJustice Ketanji Brown Jackson
Confidence
1.00
03

The law “censors speech based on viewpoint.”

quoteJustice Neil Gorsuch
Confidence
1.00
04

An 8-1 high court majority sided with a Christian counselor who argues the law banning talk therapy violates the First Amendment.

factualAP
Confidence
1.00
05

The Supreme Court ruled against a law banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ kids in Colorado.

factualAP
Confidence
1.00
§ 04

Full report

3 min read · 747 words
The Supreme Court in Washington, Nov. 4, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File) Updated [hour]:[minute] [AMPM] [timezone], [monthFull] [day], [year] Washington (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled against a law banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ kids in Colorado, one of about two dozen states that ban the discredited practice. An 8-1 high court majority sided with a Christian counselor who argues the law banning talk therapy violates the First Amendment. The justices agreed that the law raises free speech concerns and sent it back to a lower court to decide if it meets a legal standard that few laws pass. Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the court, said the law “censors speech based on viewpoint.” The First Amendment, he wrote, “stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.”Gorsuch’s opinion drew support from liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. AP AUDIO: Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ+ kids The Supreme Court has ruled against a law banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ kids in Colorado. AP correspondent Marcela Sanchez has more. A state could similarly not ban talk therapy designed to affirm a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity, Kagan wrote. “Once again, because the State has suppressed one side of a debate, while aiding the other, the constitutional issue is straightforward,” she wrote. In a solo dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that states should be free to regulate health care, even if that means incidental restrictions on speech. The decision, Jackson wrote, “opens a dangerous can of worms” that “threatens to impair states’ ability to regulate the provision of medical care in any respect.” The decision is the latest in a line of recent cases in which the justices have backed claims of religious discrimination while taking a skeptical view of LGBTQ+ rights. Counselor Kaley Chiles, with support from President Donald Trump’s Republican administration, said the law wrongly bars her from offering voluntary, faith-based therapy for kids.Chiles contends her approach is different from “conversion therapy” practices from decades ago, like shock therapy. Her attorneys argued that the ban makes it hard for parents to find therapists willing to discuss gender identity with kids unless the counseling affirms transition. “I look forward to being able to help them when they choose the goal of growing comfortable with their bodies,” Chiles said in a statement. “Counselors walking alongside these young people shouldn’t be limited to promoting state-approved goals like gender transition, which often leads to harmful drugs and surgeries.”Colorado disagreed, saying its law does allow wide-ranging conversations about gender identity and sexual orientation and exempts religious ministries. The state says the measure simply bars using therapy to try to “convert” LGBTQ+ people to heterosexuality or traditional gender expectations, a practice that has been scientifically discredited and linked to serious harm. The law doesn’t violate the First Amendment, Colorado argued, because therapy is different from other types of speech since it’s a form of health care that the state has a responsibility to regulate.Advocates for LGBTQ+ people condemned the ruling, as well as “conversion therapy.”“This is a dangerous practice that has been condemned by every major medical association in the country. Today’s decision does not change the science, and it does not change the fact that conversion therapists who harm patients will still face legal consequences,” Polly Crozier, director of family policy at GLAD Law, said in a statement. The 2019 law carries the possibility of fines and license suspension, but no one has been sanctioned under it. The ruling is expected to eventually make similar laws in other states unenforceable. Chiles was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal organization that has appeared frequently at the court in recent years. The group also represented a Christian website designer who successfully challenged Colorado anti-discrimination law because she didn’t want to work with same-sex couples.Twenty-three states have laws barring health care providers from offering “conversion therapy” for minors, and another four have some restrictions, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an advocacy group that tracks policies that impact LGBTQ+ people.The high court agreed to hear the case after the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upheld the law. Another Atlanta-based appeals court, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, had struck down similar bans in Florida. Whitehurst covers the Supreme Court and legal affairs for The Associated Press. She’s won multiple journalism awards in a career that’s spanned two decades.
§ 05

Entities

11 identified
§ 06

Keywords & salience

8 terms
conversion therapy
1.00
lgbtq+ rights
0.90
supreme court
0.80
first amendment
0.70
colorado ban
0.70
free speech
0.60
religious discrimination
0.50
health care
0.40
§ 07

Topic connections

Interactive graph
Network visualization showing 49 related topics
View Full Graph
Person Organization Location Event|Click node to navigate|Edge numbers = shared articles