- Built to Serve: The Day That Reminds Us Why We Chose Dentistry
- Journalists Catch You Up on Fauci Hearing, Peptides, and Kids’ Caffeine Consumption
- CMS finalizes 2.3% hospital pay bump, mandatory joint replacement model: 9 things to know
- How ambulatory shifts are reshaping perioperative strategy
- Cyclosporiasis cases top 18,000: 3 updates
- How Allegheny Health Network Strengthened its Foundation for IV Compounding Safety with Automation and Standardization¹
- Health plan customer service reps have AI in their ear
- Centene’s buyouts could have a $315M+ price tag for the rest of the year
- Medicare pay cut sparks specialty battle over skin cancer care
- Cardiovascular Institute of New England provides notice of data incident
- CMS locks in 2.3% inpatient hospital base pay increase, nudges back CJR-X Model start date
- Why autonomy — not just capital — is winning over cardiologists
- The $36 vs. $95 problem: How RVU negotiations are skewing physician pay
- Mississippi hospital board member, former CEO remembered as advocate for rural communities
- Pennsylvania SUD treatment locator reaches 146K users
- Top 10 dental, DSO stories in July
- Ohio youth treatment facility faces scrutiny over reported abuse: 8 notes
- What dental leaders told us in July
- Urban hospital closures and net change, by state
- Nebraska launches dashboard tracking rural health funds
- ADSO sues Colorado Dental Board over practice ownership rule
- New patient acquisition is the top growth driver for dental practices: Report
- 20 new behavioral health projects to know
- Nurses, patients protest North Star Health Alliance ASC closure
- No Surprises Act under attack by payers: 8 things to know
- Dental staffing wages up 23% since 2021: ADA
- AtlantiCare appoints anesthesiology, gastroenterology physician leaders
- Consumer dental spending up 24% over 10 years: 5 stats to know
- Baylor Scott & White joint venture expands outpatient behavioral health services
- 5 DSOs making headlines
- VA to explore GLP-1 treatment for alcohol use disorder: 4 notes
- A $5B wave of M&A hits the ASC industry
- FTC Sues Hims & Hers Over Health Privacy And Billing Practices
- 145 physician medical groups led all healthcare M&A sectors in Q1
- 10 new ASCs in July
- Healthcare exec, telemedicine company owner sentenced for $35M DME fraud scheme
- Amylyx demystifies post-bariatric hypoglycemia with patient education website
- What Dad Eats Before Conception May Influence Baby's Health
- Family History Plays Role In Genetic Risk For Breast Cancer, Researchers Find
- A look at employers' attitudes toward ICHRAs
- Revised 340B Rebate Model Pilot Program moves forward, despite provider pushback
- Function Health lands $450M in growth financing to scale tech-enabled preventive health
- Daiichi Sankyo flags accounting error, as shares tank despite revenue beat
- AbbVie's Skyrizi shrugs off new competition as it thrives in growing psoriasis market
- Op-ed: Hospitals on the edge, a time for CMS to do no harm
- Daily Routine Key To Good Health, Study Says
- Alignment Healthcare boasts 32% revenue jump in Q2, lifts 2026 outlook
- Xpovio mulligan in endometrial cancer comes up short as Karyopharm presses on in myelofibrosis
- Psilocybin Therapy Helps Ease Veterans' Severe PTSD, Pilot Study Finds
- Newsom Reverses On Long-Sought Paid Leave Benefit For California Teachers
- Nicotine Levels Are Rising Among Teens Who Vape, New Study Warns
- The Newest Federally Recognized Tribe Wants Better Healthcare. It May Be On Its Own.
- They Worked To Protect Public Health. Now They Want the Public’s Votes.
- 27 new behavioral health study findings to know
- 21 state behavioral health policy updates
- What will fuel the next wave of DSO growth
- Dentists’ biggest staffing headaches
- Shionogi makes the call on COVID pill Xocova TV spot
- Psilocybin-assisted therapy reduced PTSD symptoms: 3 notes
- Fierce Pharma Asia—Legend CEO exits; Merck’s hush-hush PD-1xVEGF plan; Otsuka’s novel ADHD nod
- Psychedelics, peptides and GLP-1s
- How 'physician-led' care team models tackle primary care's workforce problem
- How 7 systems divert behavioral health patients from the ED
- WellSpan Health, Hippocratic AI ink ‘multi-year’ partnership with plans to co-develop clinical AI agents
- Kaiser faces complaint over automated behavioral health triage system
- Free research hub Nila aims to demystify menopause, other hormone conditions
- Scientists Defend Fauci's Pandemic Work As Senate Hearing Turns Bitter
- Pfizer takes Litfulo to regulators in vitiligo challenge to Incyte, AbbVie
- Study Questions Effectiveness of Antihistamines in Easing Eczema
- Vaping Is Likely Reshaping The Future Of Cancer In The US, Study Argues
- Weekly Rundown: Counsel Health rolls out white label AI care platform; Community Health Network launches MyChart AI assistant
- New CEO Garijo sketches out vision to reverse Sanofi's fortunes as Q2 delivers impressive sales beat
- Alnylam shares tank 29% as Amvuttra disappoints with ATTR outlook cut for 2026
- Waystar boosts 2026 outlook as AI-powered RCM solutions gain traction with providers
- YouTuber MrBeast welcomes Amgen to the channel, kicking off pediatric cancer funding effort
- Booming Dupixent sales fuel Regeneron's biggest quarter since pandemic
- Sugar Consumption Early In Life Linked To Increased Dementia Risk, World War II-Era Data Show
- Work Stress Harming Middle-Age Sleep, Study Says
- RFK Jr.'s Gardasil litigation ties subject to fresh lawmaker scrutiny after Merck settlement
- Bristol Myers delays Cobenfy Alzheimer’s psychosis readout again amid another quarterly beat
- Hospice's Bad Reputation Amid Fraud Crisis Will Hurt Patients, Industry Experts Warn
- Cell Phone Ownership Linked To Lower Reading Skills In Elementary Students
- Listen to the Latest ‘KFF Health News Minute’
- Medicaid Insurers’ Contracts on the Line in Tight Governor’s Race
- Abortion Drug Law in Louisiana Heightens Hemorrhage Risk for Pregnant Patients
- Teladoc Health trims 2026 revenue forecast amid challenges with BetterHelp insurance shift
- Cigna CEO: Express Scripts seeing 'significant early interest' from clients for new rebate-free PBM model
- Viatris runs into FDA roadblock after advertising on-the-go use of cystic fibrosis inhaler
- Sanofi’s new CEO ‘looking deeply’ at late-stage pipeline as clinical clearout continues
- FTC sues Hims & Hers over data privacy, billing practices
- CMS' proposed 340B reimbursement cut—who wins, and who loses?
- Virtual care helps patients improve their gambling disorder symptoms, Birches Health finds
- Case Western Reserve University launches next-generation healthcare leadership program
- Lilly, Resilience commit $750M to boost US diabetes, obesity med production
- CMS ending Medicare Part D subsidy program
- Red Cross Declares Rare National Blood Supply Crisis Amid Summer Shortfall
- Not Just Pregnancy Fatigue: Could It Be Sleep Apnea?
- More Women Drinking During Pregnancy
- Wellstar Health System lays off 761 corporate, administrative staff
- Biogen flips '26 guidance from expected decline to sales increase
- Teva’s innovation engine offsets generics slump, leaving one analyst ‘shocked’ by Ajovy’s surge
- Talking To Your Baby? Eye Contact Is Key To Language Development, Experiment Shows
- Boosted by CMS settlement, Incyte expects Opzelura to cross $1B in 2026
- Leapfrog launches expanded ASC public reporting program
- Cyclospora Boosts Fears That Deadlier Foodborne Outbreaks Are Ahead
- DoorDash, GrubHub Delivering Junk Food To 1 In 4 Teens During School Hours
- Uninsured but Undaunted, a Surgical Patient Searched the Globe for a Deal
- Trump Has Quietly Throttled an Agency Devoted to the Safety of American Healthcare
- Hospice’s Bad Reputation Amid Fraud Crisis Will Hurt Patients, Industry Experts Warn
- Humana plans more market exits for 2027, CFO says
- PMCPA sanctions melatonin drugmaker over misleading information
- CG Life embraces next-gen era in merger with AI-native agency The Considered+AI
- How 2 FDA citations complicate Hengrui, Elevar’s push for liver cancer combo approval
- Fifth Death Reported In NYC Legionnaires' Disease Outbreak
- Many Young Adults Aren't Ready To Manage Their Own Healthcare, Poll Finds
- Can A Daily Multivitamin Help You Stay Active As You Age?
- Stellarus launches AI-powered health plan customer service representative copilot
- Prebiotic Soda Health Claims Questioned In New Nutrition Study
- Family-Based Childhood Obesity Program Helps Kids Cut Weight, Become Healthier
- To Afford Aging In Place, Older Adults Turn To 'Golden Girls' Housing
- Breakfast Can Help Teens Make Better Food Choices Throughout Their Day, Study Says
- Newsom Reverses on Long-Sought Paid Leave Benefit for Teachers in California
- FDA Panel Backs Two Peptides For Compounding, Rejects One
- How Accurate Are Photo-Based Calorie Apps? 4 Are Put To The Test
- Popular School Cafeteria Meals Need An Update To Meet Healthy Food Standards, Researchers Say
- Ovarian Syndrome Quadruples Heart Disease Risk In Women, Major Study Concludes
- Weed-Killing Chemical, Glyphosate, Linked To Premature Births In Humans, Study Says
- 'The Child Is Terrified': Doctors On Front Lines Of Measles Comeback Speak Out
- 'Yo-yo' Weight Loss Linked To Decline In Muscle Mass
- FDA Advisers Dismiss Safety Warnings, Back Four Peptide Treatments
- Frequent Marijuana Use Linked To Higher Stress Hormone Levels
- Back Pain? Try Swimming, Study Says
- Ozempic Cuts Down Calorie Intake For At Least A Year, Even If Hunger Returns, Trial Finds
- Money Problems Might Make Your Brain Old Before Its Time, Study Suggests
- Black MS Patients Dying Younger Than White Ones, Study Finds
- Headstands and Summervaults: A Statement on Crypto Vaults and Lending Strategies
- Remarks at the Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee Meeting
- Seeking Public Comment on Seeking Public Capital: Remarks Before the Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee
- Remarks to the Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee
- Statement on Regulation E-Delivery
- Paper Taper: Statement on Proposed Regulation E-Delivery
- Statement on Proposed Regulation E-Delivery
- Senate HELP committee advances nominees for CDC director, HHS preparedness head
- Remarks before the American-Hellenic Chamber of Commerce
- Remarks at the Society for Corporate Governance Conference
- Zimmer Biomet to Hire 500 in India as New Bengaluru Technology Centre Drives AI and MedTech Innovation
- Zimmer Biomet to Hire 500 in India as New Bengaluru Technology Centre Drives AI and MedTech Innovation
- AdaptHealth Investigates Data Breach After Social Engineering Attack, Possible Link to ShinyHunters Emerges
- AdaptHealth Investigates Data Breach After Social Engineering Attack, Possible Link to ShinyHunters Emerges
- Statement on the 2026 Regulatory Agenda
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.
Michigan's witch's coven was just forced to eat their unconstitutional conversion therapy ban:
Court Stops Michigan From ‘Harming Children’ by Forcing Transgender Double Standard, Lawyer Says
By Tyler O’Neil • July 30, 2026Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer acknowledged that her law against "conversion therapy" violates the First Amendment.
A district court judge blocked Michigan from enforcing a “conversion therapy” law, in a ruling that protects children, according to the attorney representing Catholic therapists challenging the law.
“Michigan was harming children—pushing kids toward a lifetime of harmful, irreversible medical interventions by muzzling compassionate counselors who could help them,” Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at the religious freedom law firm Becket and the lead attorney for counselors challenging the law, told the Daily Signal after the court ruling Thursday.
“Thankfully, the Constitution was there to stop them,” Goodrich added. “Now kids can get the compassionate, scientifically based counseling they need—which is a win for kids, counselors, and common sense.”
A district court judge blocked Michigan from enforcing part of its law banning “conversion therapy” for minors, ruling the law violates the First Amendment by compelling therapists to support transgender ideology.
“For example, speech that supports and affirms an individual’s desire to undergo a gender transition is permitted,” the lawsuit states. “Speech that supports and affirms an individual’s desire to embrace her biological sex is forbidden.”
The ‘Conversion Therapy’ Ban
In July 2023, Democrat Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed two laws banning “conversion therapy” for minors and defining the term to include “any practice or treatment by a mental health professional that seeks to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” The law also states that “conversion therapy does not include counseling that provides assistance to an individual undergoing a gender transition,” among other things.
Emily McJones, a licensed therapist who runs Little Flower Counseling in Jackson, and Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee and Hillsdale Counties sued to block enforcement of the laws as applied to them. According to the lawsuit, Catholic Charities and McJones provide patient-driven talk therapy from a Catholic perspective, and their patients have reported struggling to reconcile their faith with same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria (the painful and persistent identification with the gender opposite their sex).
The counselors help minors address the underlying causes of their discomfort, alleviate their distress, and embrace their biology without resorting to sex-rejecting procedures.
The First Amendment and ‘Conversion Therapy’
The counselors argued, in the lawsuit’s first count, that the law violates the First Amendment’s free speech clause by imposing a “content-based restriction on speech,” noting that it only bars patient-directed talk therapy in one direction on LGBTQ+ issues.
While a federal court initially refused to block the law’s enforcement against counselors, the law firm Becket appealed and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled in their favor, urging the lower court to impose a preliminary injunction.
In March, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a therapist in a very similar case, Chiles v. Salazar. The court enjoined Colorado’s enforcement of a similar ban on “conversion therapy,” ruling that Colorado could not enforce the law against a Christian therapist who offers patient-directed talk therapy and who holds to traditional Christian teaching on gender and sexuality.
Whitmer, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, and the other defendants agreed to settle Catholic Charities’ case, and a district court judge issued a permanent injunction Thursday, holding that the law, as applied against the therapists, violates the First Amendment. The injunction blocks Michigan officials from penalizing therapists for providing talk therapy.
The order notes that the parties have entered into a settlement to determine attorney fees.
“Plaintiffs have demonstrated success on the merits of count one in their complaint and established irreparable injury and that an injunction is in the public interest,” the judge wrote.
The offices of Whitmer and Nessel did not immediately respond to the Daily Signal’s request for comment.
Why Therapy?
Kaley Chiles, the Christian therapist in the Colorado case, told the Daily Signal that she thinks talk therapy is a better way to address gender dysphoria than the sex-rejecting procedures euphemistically described as “gender-affirming care.”
“I think there’s a conflation of feelings and reality” on gender dysphoria, she said. “We treat eating disorders, addictions, even trauma—trauma treatment is essentially the process of invalidating your feelings.”
“Over the course of therapy, what you want is actually a full invalidation in thought, in feeling, in sensation, in experience, that the trauma response is true,” she explained.
She cited a peer-reviewed study finding little evidence for positive impacts from sex-rejecting procedures, and others suggesting they cause harm.
Goodrich, the attorney for Catholic Charities, noted that “Michigan is now admitting its law is unconstitutional.”
“Its surrender confirms that the Constitution and the best available science are on the side of counselors who help children find peace with their bodies,” he said. “States still trying to censor that care should take note.”
Get MHF Insights
News and tips for your healthcare freedom.
We never spam you. One-step unsubscribe.





















