SCOTUS might rule against conversion therapy ban

[Morphine Prince 109,667]

A majority of the Supreme Court signaled Tuesday it is prepared to rule against Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy” for minors, with several justices indicating they sympathize with a licensed counselor who says the law violates her First Amendment rights.

In one of the most significant cases the high court will address this year, the justices were asked to decide if states may ban the discredited practice, which purports to “convert” gay people to heterosexuality or transgender people to cisgender. The outcome could have sweeping implications: Advocacy groups say roughly half of US states have banned the therapy for minors.

During a surprisingly low-key and short 90-minute session, several justices appeared to reject the idea the state can regulate “talk therapy” the same way it may regulate medical conduct. Much of the debate seemed to focus on how Colorado would lose, rather than whether it would do so.

Chief Justice John Roberts pointed to prior Supreme Court decisions in which the court declined to carve out a different First Amendment approach to professional speech. It was a theme several of the court’s conservatives returned to repeatedly.

“Just because they’re engaged in conduct doesn’t mean that their words aren’t protected,” Roberts said.

Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor in Colorado, has challenged the law on those grounds. Her “faith-informed counseling” would be “speech only” and she says her clients would voluntarily seek her services. She rejects the term “conversion therapy” and instead describes the work she hopes to do as helping clients who “have a goal to become comfortable and at peace” with their body.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/07/politics/supreme-court-conversion-therapy-lgbtq-oral-arguments

 

[dynamite 66,633]

SCOTUS

Sh*t c*nt of the united states 

Edited October 7, 2025 by dynamite

[PartySick 172,545]

I say we revoke the queer/ally status of anybody that didn't vote for Hillary in 2016 or Kamala in 2024  

Y'all truly have set us back decades

[RenegAde 20,557]

9 minutes ago, PartySick said:

I say we revoke the queer/ally status of anybody that didn't vote for Hillary in 2016 or Kamala in 2024  

Y'all truly have set us back decades

How did they attain those status to begin

[TheARTPOPball 1,646]

This is ridiculous 

[Louvre 4,493]

But..b-but... I thought we didn't want to talk to minors about their sexuality..? Surely this has to be the woke left converting minor's sexualities, no?

[27monster27 15,864]

Me reading the shortened title because of formatting:

"SCOTUS might rule against conversion-" 

 

Me seeing the full title:

"-therapy ban" 

 

This is gross. I would say that I hope that gays for Trump feel about this, but then I remembered that they like to victim blame trans poeple into saying that stuff like this is their fault. FVCK PICK-MES.

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,612]

Every day this administration makes my job harder. 

[Controversiaga 16,075]

Jfc what country or planet is safe for us at this point 

[TheARTPOPball 1,646]

3 hours ago, Louvre said:

But..b-but... I thought we didn't want to talk to minors about their sexuality..? Surely this has to be the woke left converting minor's sexualities, no?

Exactly what i was thinking. 

[Lord Mayhem 3,428]

How would any credible and trustworthy therapist allow their personal religious beliefs infiltrate their professional work when dealing with mental health and the complexity of human psychology? 

And how in the world would SCOTUS see this as appropriate to consider bringing this back? 

[Lucas 31,126]

I'm not an english native speaker but doesn't "ruling against ban" mean they are against the ban?

[Mitch XCX 1,059]

2 hours ago, Lucas said:

I'm not an english native speaker but doesn't "ruling against ban" mean they are against the ban?

Yes. Double negative makes it positive (they are AGAINST the BAN), meaning they are in favour of conversion therapy.