Chiles v. Salazar
The Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that as applied to Chiles's talk therapy the law regulates speech based on viewpoint and that the lower courts failed to apply sufficiently rigorous First Amendment scrutiny. Justice Gorsuch wrote for eight Justices, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh and Barrett. Justice Kagan concurred, joined by Justice Sotomayor. Justice Jackson dissented alone, arguing the state was regulating the provision of medical care and restricting a provider's speech only incidentally.
Decision
Legal Issues
BrynoDC Coverage 2 videos
TikTok 
YouTube Opinion of the Court
Overview
Overview
A case in which the Court held that a Colorado law banning "conversion therapy" violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
The Conclusion
Conclusion
The Supreme Court held that a Colorado law banning "conversion therapy" violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The decision struck down the state's restrictions on therapeutic speech regarding sexual orientation and gender identity.
Summary
A case in which the Court held that a Colorado law banning "conversion therapy" violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court held that a Colorado law banning "conversion therapy" violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The decision struck down the state's restrictions on therapeutic speech regarding sexual orientation and gender identity.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support