- 20 most socially responsible hospitals, according to Lown
- Worried About Your Aging Parents? Welcome to the Caregiving Club
- Medicare’s AI Push Snarls Patients and Doctors in Errors and Delays
- Albany Med Health System eyes affiliation with Ellis Medicine
- 1.4 million patients, 7 health systems caught in AI company data breach
- Banner Health clinicians file to unionize
- New Hampshire system names new chief strategy officer
- 8 recent studies on AI in diagnosis and clinical reasoning
- HHS launches Operation TrailBlazer to speed clinical trials: 5 notes
- Iowa 1st to fully allocate year 1 rural health funds
- ‘I would love to tell Mark Cuban to get involved’: What physician consolidation is costing patients
- Illinois passes bill regulating dental reimbursement practices
- The shifting dental care landscape
- Duke Health names ophthalmology chair
- Health insurer CEOs could face criminal liability for denials that lead to injury, death under Pennsylvania bill
- Harvard to end faculty dental practice, transfer clinic to private owner due to financial constraints
- A physician’s plan to bring back practice autonomy to South Carolina
- Cardiologists push back on expansion of WISeR model
- Are ASCs ready for CMS’ new oversight rules?
- MCNA Dental agrees to multimillion-dollar settlement over 2023 ransomware attack
- Former Iowa dental office employee accused of using patient financial information for personal purchases
- Optum Behavioral Health names chief medical officer
- Stark law’s $632 million reckoning: The 5 biggest cases in 5 years
- ASCs’ robot evidence problem
- United Concordia expands dental coverage for patients with chronic conditions
- Who’s winning, losing the physician practice acquisition race?
- OIG flags Pennsylvania behavioral insurer for faulty prior auth denials
- Independence Health to open 28-bed behavioral health unit
- ICON Dental Partners appoints VP of dental partnerships
- These 'socially responsible' hospitals deliver on quality, value and equity
- Heartland Dental adds Missouri practice
- 4 dentists making headlines
- Growing ketamine use raises safety concerns
- AI’s growing role in mental healthcare: 5 notes
- Does ASC consolidation have a ceiling?
- Washington lawmakers eye corporate medicine ban after Oregon’s PeaceHealth test
- Pennsylvania cardiology group opens new $8.2M ASC
- Patient portal messages doubled since 2020, study finds, underscoring challenges to physician workloads
- Clover Hill Dairy Recalls All Cheese in Deadly Listeria Outbreak
- Ensemble Health Partners secures strategic growth investment from Thoreau
- Hospital margins inched higher in April, but still remain below 2025
- Middle-Aged Women Drink More, Know Less About Breast Cancer Risk
- CMS Proposes TAVR Medicare Coverage is Potential Boost for Edwards Lifesciences
- CARsgen makes history as China approves world's first CAR-T therapy for solid tumors
- High Hurdles Thwart Kidney Patients' Pursuit Of Life-Saving Transplants
- Rising Healthcare Costs Leave Many Americans Less Secure
- Short Videos Help First-Time Dads Learn Newborn Safety Basics
- Federal Push To Increase U.S. Primary Care Docs Has Fizzled, Study Says
- US to investigate Germany's proposed drug spending reforms
- Alnylam scolded over promotional activity after Pfizer complaint
- They're Uninsured After Obamacare Became Too Costly. And They're Far From Alone.
- Indiana Takes On Powerful Hospitals by Capping Prices They Charge Employers
- Prosper AI lands $30M backed by Andreessen Horowitz to build AI workforce for healthcare operations
- Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk top AI citation share as new report questions DTC spend culture
- Fish Oil Supplements May Be A Bust For Alzheimer's Prevention
- Prehab Can Boost Seniors' Recuperation From Spinal Fusion Surgery, Trial Finds
- Dog Owners Feel Similar Grief Whether Pets Euthanized, Die Naturally
- Ozempic Might Cut Risk Of Broken Bones, Study Says
- Massage Guns Can Cause Eye Damage, Vision Loss, Case Report Warns
- A 5-month sprint: Behind Pfizer’s $10B deal and Innovent’s global pharma ambition
- 1st free dental clinic opens in New Jersey
- 8 new behavioral health projects to know
- Oregon prosecutors urge state to fix mental health system
- The case for layering behavioral healthcare models
- Rural, independent Kansas hospitals launch clinically integrated network
- 12 behavioral health services, facility closures | 2026
- Higher, short-acting opioid doses linked to 8% lower discharge risk: 4 notes
- FTC orders Aurobindo to divest 4 drugs to complete $250M Lannett acquisition
- Congressional Budget Office calls for more research on No Surprises Act unintended impacts
- HHS opens applications for $700M in mental health, addiction funding, with $96M for new STREETS program
- Ebola Infections Climb, Could Take Year To Contain, Health Officials Say
- Why a deviation investigation still takes two weeks in the age of AI
- Feeling Sleepy During the Day? It Could Be a Warning Sign for High Blood Pressure
- FTC, states sue transgender health association over 'misleading' gender care guidance
- Healthcare organizations still struggle to operationalize AI at scale: Arcadia survey
- Pfizer hunts for new CFO as Denton prepares to hang up gloves, wave goodbye to pharma
- Major League Pitchers Might Avoid Elbow Injuries By Altering Their Approach, Simulation Suggests
- Birth Control Pills Might Increase Binge Eating Risk, Study Finds
- Women Might Lower Their Heart Risk By Lifting Weights, Study Says
- Personalized Brain Implant Provides Step-By-Step Walking Boost For Parkinson's Patients
- Amid industry’s cell therapy automation push, Cellares and Ori dominate the field: report
- Most Americans Are Surviving Cancer. But The Mental Health Challenges Can Persist.
- Listen to the Latest ‘KFF Health News Minute’
- Readers Curse Medical Debt and Defend Spelling Therapy
- Sandwiched Between Caring for Kids and Aging Parents? Reach Out for Resources
- Arrests of Immigrant Parents Create Mental Health Crisis for Children
- Novo's success with oral Wegovy has been fueled by 'familiarity': Spherix
- Preparing for LEAD: Why post-acute visibility is the key to long-term value-based success
- One Medical Seniors reports data breach of third-party vendor impacting 'limited' number of patients
- A look at Epic's long-term play to build tech for operations, starting with scheduling
- U.K. Moves To Ban Social Media For Children
- Pregnant Woman Exposed to 45 Common Chemicals, Study Finds
- OhioHealth reaches settlement with DOJ, Ohio AG on antitrust lawsuit
- 4 years after snub, GSK partnership helps Spero get Utebzi across FDA finish line
- Despite 'decent' data, Verastem rethinks options for approved oncology combo in pancreatic cancer
- OIG report raises red flags about maternal health 'ghost networks' in Medicaid managed care
- Why It’s Time to Sunset AI Point Solutions and Consolidate Platforms
- Lantern, Marathon Health team up to launch integrated care management model
- The New Frontier of Care Management: Bridging the Empathy Gap with Intelligence
- Novo Nordisk opens Czech plant and unveils $29M upgrade to China facility
- Whoop, HealthEx partner to connect members’ medical records and biometric data
- GSK runs first DTC ad for would-be asthma blockbuster Exdensur
- Novo security breach claimed by hacking groups seeking multi-million-dollar ransoms: reports
- After FDA sign-off, Colorado's drug import plan faces tough road ahead
- Lower Risk Of Death, Clots Among Autoimmune Patients Taking GLP-1 Drugs
- Surgical Menopause Tied To Worse Sexual And Urinary Symptoms
- Post-Op Delirium Common In Seniors, But Not All Hospitals Screen For It
- Nortiva purrs into action with long-acting Lynx platform salvaged from Langer startup
- Why one life insurer is going big on health incentives
- Weekly Rundown: Lumeris adds symptom-checking tool to AI platform; DeepIntent rolls out agentic AI tool for healthcare marketers
- Before you build or buy care navigation AI, answer this
- Early-Onset Cancers Are On The Rise. Knowing Your Family History Is Crucial.
- Minimally Invasive Procedure Eases Arthritis Knee Pain, Study Finds
- More Americans Are Surviving Cancer. But the Mental Health Challenges Can Persist.
- Democrats Seek To Spotlight Rising Health Costs by Forcing Vote on Trump Regulation
- Tennessee Pharmacies Sell Potent Ivermectin, Led by Anti-Vaccine Doctor Who’s Taken ‘Bucketloads’
- Health services deal value holds steady in 2026 with higher bar for investment: PwC
- Big Pharma’s Big Brand: Inside Eli Lilly’s marketing culture
- CDC, FDA Tackle New World Screwworm, Including Drug Authorization
- 'Biopharma ecosystem is back to full health,' fueled by M&A: PwC
- Lifestyle Changes Can Reduce Your Risk For Multiple Chronic Diseases
- FDA, UK drug regulator deepen transatlantic ties with new liaison program
- People Walk, Exercise Less After Starting Ozempic, Zepbound
- Family Finances Shape Children’s Brain Development, Study Finds
- At-Home Blood Pressure Monitoring Reduces Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke
- Moderna hires Novartis vet to lead commercial, upsizes role for Hoge as potential launches loom
- Long-Awaited Rule Aims To Boost ACA Choices While Embracing Higher Deductibles
- Many Men Are Prescribed Testosterone Without Proper Testing
- Recipharm channels ‘multi-million-dollar' US manufacturing upgrade, targeting domestic biologics demand
- Organic Baby Formula Recalled Following Botulism Cases
- FDA Approves First Over-the-Counter Glucose Monitor for Children, The Stelo Glucose Biosensor System
- You've Won The Game
- Many Patients Stop And Restart GLP-1 Meds, Study Finds
- Half Of U.S. Parents Track Their Adult Children’s Location
- Taking GLP-1s While On BP Meds May Up Your Risk Of Dizzy Spells, Fainting
- Trust In CDC Plummets Under Trump Administration, New Poll Shows
- Remarks to the US-CEE Connection: Transatlantic Challenges in Law, Business & Policy
- Statement Regarding Minimum Pricing Increments and Access Fee Caps
- Statement at the SEC Open Meeting on the Trade-Through Rule and Locked and Crossed Markets Provisions of Regulation NMS
- Disorder Protection Rule: Statement on the Proposed Amendments to Rule 611 and Other Provisions of Regulation NMS
- Statement on the Proposed Amendments to Regulation NMS
- Beyond China and Japan: How biopharma is expanding rare disease access across Asia-Pacific
- This Old House: Improving and Remodeling Our Registered Offering and Filer Status Regimes
- Peirce Out: Remarks at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Capital Markets Summit
- Medtronic Advances Hugo Robotic Surgery Platform with Key FDA Filings and Product Approvals
- Medtronic Posts Strongest Revenue Growth in a Decade, Driven by Cardiovascular and Surgical Businesses
- Boston Scientific Plans Indiana Distribution Center, 300 New Jobs
- “Harmonization: We’ll Have Lots to Talk About”
- Remarks at the Investor Advisory Committee Meeting
- A Quarter for Your Thoughts: Remarks at the Meeting of the SEC Investor Advisory Committee
Michigan healthcare freedom community forum
Like Michigan, Colorado banned counselors from helping patients overcome gender dysphoria to become reconciled to their genetic sex.
Please note: I avoid the term "conversion therapy" here, because it's a made-up term, designed to frame the argument to the Left's advantage. Michigan even embedded the new definition in our legal code, attempting to make it stick.
The Left invented the term "conversion therapy" as a take-off from "aversion therapy," rightly hated and abandoned in the last century. I'm old enough to remember electric shock therapy, and that "treatment" has nothing to do with today's counseling for dysphoria.
Thankfully, a Christian Colorado counselor took on the state law's violation of First Amendment rights, and SCOTUS has granted certiorari.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/10/politics/conversion-therapy-supreme-court-colorado/index.html?
Supreme Court to review Colorado law barring conversion therapy for minors
CNN — The Supreme Court on Monday said it would review a Colorado law that bars mental health professionals from practicing “conversion therapy” for minors, a discredited practice that attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor and practicing Christian, challenged that law under the First Amendment, claiming that her patients voluntarily seek out her services.
Chiles, who was represented by the religious group Alliance Defending Freedom, argued that the laws enacted in Colorado and more than 19 other states “silence counselors’ ability to express views their clients seek.” But state officials countered that they may regulate the medical treatment of patients.
“A professional’s treatment of her patients and clients is fundamentally different, for First Amendment purposes, from laypersons’ interactions with each other,” Colorado officials said.
The case, similar to one the Supreme Court rejected in late 2023 from a licensed marriage and family counselor in Washington state, echoes another high profile case pending on the docket. In US v. Skrmetti, Tennessee is defending a ban on puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender youth on the grounds that the state had broad power to regulate medicine.
In that case, the court’s conservatives signaled during oral arguments in December that they were prepared to defer to state lawmakers on such bans. A decision is expected by July.
Critics say conversion therapy – which attempts to convert people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning – into straight or cisgender people, causes serious emotional harm and can have deadly results.
Chiles sued over the Colorado law in 2022. A federal district court denied her request to temporarily suspend its enforcement and the Denver-based 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Chiles appealed to the Supreme Court in November.
In a similar appeal rejected by the high court in 2023, three conservative justices – Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas – said they would have considered the case.
Under the state law, Thomas wrote in five-page opinion, “licensed counselors cannot voice anything other than the state-approved opinion on minors with gender dysphoria without facing punishment.”
“Although the court declines to take this particular case, I have no doubt that the issue it presents will come before the court again,” he wrote at the time. “When it does, the court should do what it should have done here: grant certiorari to consider what the First Amendment requires.”
Alito said in a brief dissent in 2023 that the court should have taken up the case to address an issue that lower courts have been divided on.
“In recent years, 20 States and the District of Columbia have adopted laws prohibiting or restricting the practice of conversion therapy,” Alito wrote. “It is beyond dispute that these laws restrict speech, and all restrictions on speech merit careful scrutiny.”
CNN’s Devan Cole contributed to this report.
The First Amendment triumphed at the Supreme Court today. AG Nessel has the sadz:
Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ+ kids
By Lindsay Whitehurst - March 31, 2026WASHINGTON (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.
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.
Meanwhile, the Michigan conversion therapy ban written by our Democratic witches' coven in 2023 is about to go as well, after a little pot stirring:
High court decision clears path for challenge to Michigan’s conversion therapy ban
Justices’ decision in Colorado case revives lawsuit against state’s 2023 law
By Katherine Dailey - March 31, 2026A lawsuit brought against the state of Michigan by Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee and Hillsdale Counties will continue to proceed in federal court now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in a case out of Colorado that the state’s ban on conversion therapy should be subject to a high legal standard known as “strict scrutiny” for potential First Amendment violations.
That case, Chiles v. Salazar, was decided on Tuesday in an 8-1 ruling in favor of a Colorado-based licensed therapist who argued that the state law attempted to regulate what she could tell her clients in talk therapy. She argued that the law violates her First Amendment right to free speech and interferes with her ability to practice counseling in a way that aligns with her religious convictions.
The Supreme Court sent the final decision in the case on how to enforce the strict scrutiny test, a more stringent standard of review than had been previously applied, back down to a lower court, though Amy Howe of SCOTUSBlog wrote that the opinion “strongly hinted that the ban would fail that test.”
The ruling from the nation’s top court was quickly criticized by both Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in a press release.
“Today’s ruling is as disappointing as it is harmful,” Nessel said. “Medical experts have long debunked conversion therapy as a destructive, demoralizing and debunked practice which increases depression and the risk of suicide for LGBTQ+ youth. Free speech is a sacred right in America, but it should not provide a runway in which medical professionals can actively harm their patients.
In Michigan, Catholic Charities v. Whitmer had been stayed pending an order from the Supreme Court in the case from Colorado. The law in question has also been paused from being enforced by a preliminary injunction from the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that was issued in December.
Whitmer signed Michigan’s law against conversion therapy in 2023, making it the 22nd state to have such a ban on the books.
Conversion therapy, which Whitmer defined at the time as “any intervention that attempts to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity,” has been repeatedly disregarded by medical professionals and is largely seen as harmful, especially in terms of increasing suicidality among LGBTQ+ youth.
The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry — in alignment with a number of other medical groups — has said that conversion therapies “lack scientific credibility and clinical utility” and that “there is evidence that such interventions are harmful.” As such, the group states that these kinds of attempted treatments should not be part of any behavioral health treatment for children or teens.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is disappointing, but it does not change who we are,” Whitmer said in the press release responding to the decision. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. As long as I’m governor, every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves.”
State Rep. Jason Hoskins (D-Southfield), who wrote the legislation banning the practice, said the decision should not at all be interpreted to mean conversion therapy is ever acceptable.
“Conversion therapy is a fraud. It is malpractice and it is still deeply damaging to young people in Michigan. Every major medical and mental health organization has condemned conversion therapy as unethical and dangerous. The evidence is clear. These practices are linked to higher rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide attempts. That has not changed,” Hoskins said in a statement.
The lawsuit in Michigan is currently before the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan, and the press release from Nessel’s office stated that the parties in the case are “expected to meet, confer, and update the District Court within the next 14 days about what should happen next in their case.”
Nessel also noted in the press release that her office is “reviewing today’s decision in advance of our next meeting before the court to determine our next steps.”
And from the peanut gallery:
Rep. Hoskins, Author of Michigan’s Conversion Therapy Ban, Responds to U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Colorado Law
Press Statement | Office of State Rep. Jason HoskinsLANSING, Mich., March 31, 2026 — State Rep. Jason Hoskins (D-Southfield), author of Michigan’s law banning conversion therapy for minors, issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision striking down Colorado’s law:
“As someone who worked hard to pass legislation banning conversion therapy, I did so because I believe every young person deserves to be safe, supported, and affirmed, not subjected to practices rooted in shame and rejection.
“I want to be clear. The Supreme Court’s decision does not mean conversion therapy is safe, effective, or should ever be acceptable.
“Conversion therapy is a fraud. It is malpractice and it is still deeply damaging to young people in Michigan. Every major medical and mental health organization has condemned conversion therapy as unethical and dangerous. The evidence is clear. These practices are linked to higher rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide attempts. That has not changed.
“What this decision does is make it harder for states to protect young people before harm occurs. It draws a line that is difficult to defend. When treatment involves surgical tools or medication, the state may impose safeguards to prevent harm. But when the same harm is inflicted through a course of treatment delivered in words — talk therapy that can induce shame, reinforce stigma, and are associated with increased rates of depression, trauma, anxiety, and suicidality — the state is left with diminished authority to act. That is wrong.
“And let’s be honest about what this is: families are often paying thousands of dollars for services that do not work and cause real harm. That is not care. That is exploitation.
“This decision does not eliminate accountability. Survivors still have legal options, including consumer fraud claims, medical malpractice suits, and other legal actions to hold bad actors responsible.
“This fight is not over. We will continue to explore every avenue available to protect young people and hold those who harm them accountable, because no child should be made to feel like they need to be ‘fixed’ to be loved.”
A brief but useful legal analysis of SCOTUS' decision in Chiles v. Salazar from Mark Movsesian:
https://reason.com/volokh/2026/04/02/a-short-take-on-chiles-v-salazar/
A Short Take on Chiles v. Salazar
Another religious freedom case in a free speech guise
By Mark Movsesian | April 2, 2026The Supreme Court ruled this week, 8-1, in Chiles v. Salazar, that Colorado may not apply its ban on conversion therapy for minors to prohibit a licensed counselor's talk therapy. Justice Gorsuch wrote for the Court; Justice Kagan concurred, joined by Justice Sotomayor; Justice Jackson dissented. The Court held that, as applied to therapist Kayla Chiles's conversations with clients, Colorado's law discriminates on the basis of viewpoint and therefore triggers the most searching First Amendment scrutiny.
A couple points. First, this is not, formally speaking, a religion case. It's a Free Speech Clause case. Indeed, as far as I can tell, the word "religion" does not even appear in the Court's opinion. But the case is religion-adjacent. Chiles described herself in the litigation as a practicing Christian whose views about sex and gender are informed by her faith, and she said that some clients seek her out because they want counseling consistent with those convictions. So although religion is not part of the Court's doctrinal analysis, it is very much part of the background.
That feature places Chiles in a familiar line of First Amendment cases. Think of 303 Creative, another Gorsuch opinion. Or Barnette, the WWII-era flag salute case. Both were free speech cases in doctrinal terms, but religious conviction supplied much of the underlying human drama. One sees something similar here. Disputes touching religious freedom often come to the Court not under the Religion Clauses, but in the guise of free speech. Religion influences what people say--or don't say.
The key to the Court's reasoning is viewpoint discrimination. Colorado's law allows counseling that affirms a minor's sexual orientation or gender identity, but forbids counseling that seeks to help a minor change or redirect sexual orientation or gender identity. For the Court, that means the State is not simply regulating treatment as such. It is permitting one side of a contested moral and psychological question while suppressing the other. That, the Court says, is about as serious a First Amendment problem as one can have.
Second, it's notable how little work the formal strict-scrutiny framework seems to do once the Court reaches that conclusion. The Court says that content-based restrictions ordinarily trigger strict scrutiny, and that viewpoint discrimination is an especially egregious form of content discrimination. But it does not linger over the familiar steps of balancing: compelling interest, narrow tailoring, least restrictive means. Instead, once the Court identifies viewpoint discrimination, the case is largely over. The rest of the opinion is devoted mostly to rejecting Colorado's efforts to characterize the law as regulation of professional conduct rather than speech. Chiles thus resembles 303 Creative in this way as well. In 303 Creative, too, the Court avoided applying the strict-scrutiny balancing test in a serious way.
For those interested, I discuss Chiles in a short Legal Spirits episode, here.
The only fault with this analysis is its failure to emphasize that both religious freedom and free speech are guaranteed by the same U.S. Constitutional Amendment, The First! There is a very good reason the Founding Fathers assembled related rights in the First amendment.
Get MHF Insights
News and tips for your healthcare freedom.
We never spam you. One-step unsubscribe.





















