Subscribe to the CT4F Newsletter to stay informed!
Chiles v. Salazar, Explained for Christian Parents Who Don't Have Time to Read a Legal Brief
Chiles v. Salazar is a Supreme Court case challenging Colorado's law protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed therapists.
Quick Takeaways
Chiles v. Salazar is a Supreme Court case challenging Colorado's law protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed therapists.
The therapist bringing the case, Kaley Chiles, is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization with a $104 million annual budget and a long record of anti-LGBTQ litigation.
Colorado's law applies only to licensed professionals. It does not restrict parents, clergy, or faith communities.
Four Christian families submitted sworn testimony to the Supreme Court describing the devastating harm conversion therapy caused their children and their relationships.
A ruling in Chiles's favor could strip states of the power to hold licensed therapists accountable for practicing discredited techniques on minors.
What the Case Is Actually About
In 2019, Colorado enacted the Minor Conversion Therapy Law, or MCTL, as part of the state's Mental Health Practice Act. The law prohibits licensed mental health professionals from practicing conversion therapy on clients under eighteen years old. It defines conversion therapy as any practice that attempts to change a minor's same-sex attraction or how they see themselves. It does not apply to pastors, counselors working outside a licensed clinical setting, or parents.
Kaley Chiles is a licensed therapist in Colorado who says she wants to offer this kind of counseling to clients who request it for religious reasons. She sued the state, arguing the law violates her First Amendment right to free speech. The case worked its way through the federal courts, with both the district court and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against her. The Supreme Court agreed to hear it.
Oral arguments were held in October 2025. A decision has not yet been issued.
The First Amendment Question, in Plain Terms
Here is the core legal question: is what a licensed therapist says to a child in a clinical session "speech" protected by the First Amendment, or is it "professional conduct" that the state can regulate?
This matters because states have long regulated what licensed professionals can and cannot do, including doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, and financial advisors. A doctor cannot prescribe a treatment they know causes harm just because the patient requests it. A lawyer cannot advise a client to commit a crime and call it free speech.
Colorado argues that the law governs professional conduct, in this case the practice of a specific discredited treatment, and only incidentally involves speech. The First Amendment, Colorado contends, does not protect a licensed professional's right to harm a patient regardless of the language used to do it.
Chiles argues that talk therapy is speech, and that restricting what a therapist can say to a willing client is a restriction on free expression.
The Supreme Court must decide which view applies.
Who Is Behind This Case
Kaley Chiles is the named plaintiff, but understanding who Alliance Defending Freedom is and what they have built gives important context for the case's stakes and ambitions.
ADF reported revenues of more than $104 million in 2022. It has played a role in at least 74 Supreme Court decisions and has been involved in drafting legislation across dozens of states on issues ranging from abortion access to transgender rights. It was the organization behind the Dobbs model legislation that ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade. The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated ADF as an anti-LGBTQ hate group.
This case did not arise organically from a therapist's personal legal concerns. It was designed and funded as a vehicle for a larger legal strategy. Christian parents evaluating the case deserve to understand whose interests are actually being served by it.
What Christian Families Testified
Perhaps the most important voices in this case are not the lawyers. Four Christian parents and one Evangelical pastor submitted sworn testimony to the Supreme Court opposing the therapist's position, as detailed in the amicus brief filed by parents and clergy in support of Colorado's law.
Linda Robertson lost her son Ryan in 2009 after years of conversion therapy led him to cope with shame through drug use. Joyce Calvo's daughter Alana, a devout young woman who had dreamed of becoming a nun, died by suicide in 2019 after being directed to conversion therapy through her Archdiocese. Martha Conley, the mother of Garrard Conley whose story became the memoir and film Boy Erased, describes watching conversion therapy send her son into a deep depression. Paulette Trimmer's son was taught by a conversion therapy program that his parents' failings had caused him to be gay, fracturing their relationship for years.
All four parents remain people of faith. All four now urge other Christian parents not to make the same choice they did. Their testimony describes why this case matters right now for families in every state.
What Each Possible Outcome Means for Families
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Colorado, state laws protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed practitioners remain intact. Families in protected states keep those safeguards. Other states retain the authority to enact similar laws.
If the Court rules in favor of Chiles, those protections are weakened or eliminated. Licensed therapists in every state could gain the right to practice conversion therapy on minors, even in states that have explicitly prohibited it, by framing the practice as protected speech. Families would lose a key layer of accountability for what happens to their children in private clinical settings.
For Christian parents, the practical question is straightforward: do you want licensed professionals to be held to standards of care when working with your children, or not? That is what is actually at stake.
What Stays Available to Families Regardless of the Ruling
Whatever the Court decides, some things do not change. Parents can seek pastoral guidance. Churches can offer spiritual support. Families can have honest, faith-rooted conversations at home about hard questions. None of that is before the Court.
What is before the Court is whether licensed therapists, who hold state-issued credentials and have special access to vulnerable minors, can be regulated in what they practice. Families who have shared their stories publicly about what conversion therapy cost them did so to help other parents avoid the same harm. Their testimony is the clearest guide available for what this case means beyond the legal briefs.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Chiles v. Salazar in simple terms?
A Colorado therapist represented by Alliance Defending Freedom is asking the Supreme Court to strike down Colorado's law preventing licensed therapists from practicing conversion therapy on minors. She argues the law violates her free speech rights. Colorado argues it regulates professional medical conduct, not speech. A decision is pending.
Does this case affect my right to get pastoral counseling for my child?
No. Colorado's law, and the case challenging it, applies exclusively to licensed mental health professionals operating in a clinical capacity. Pastors, youth ministers, and faith communities are not affected by this law or this case in any state.
Who is Alliance Defending Freedom and why are they involved?
ADF is a conservative Christian legal organization with revenues exceeding $104 million annually. They represent Kaley Chiles and are using this case to pursue a broader legal strategy aimed at limiting states' ability to regulate conversion therapy. They have been involved in shaping legislation across dozens of states and multiple Supreme Court cases.
What did the Christian families who testified say?
Four Christian parents submitted sworn testimony describing in detail how conversion therapy harmed their children and shattered their family relationships. Every parent expressed profound regret. Two lost their children entirely: one to drug overdose, one to suicide.
When will the Supreme Court issue a decision?
Oral arguments were heard in October 2025. The Court typically issues decisions by the end of its term in late June or early July. A decision is expected by summer 2026.
Sources and Further Reading
Who Is Alliance Defending Freedom? A Guide for Christian Families -- Conversion Truth for Families -- CT4F's overview of ADF's history, litigation strategy, funding, and track record, providing essential context for understanding who is driving the Chiles v. Salazar case and why.
Why Chiles v. Salazar Matters Right Now -- Conversion Truth for Families -- CT4F's explainer on the stakes of the pending Supreme Court decision for families in states with and without existing conversion therapy protections.
Real Stories From Christian Families Affected by Conversion Therapy -- Conversion Truth for Families -- First-person accounts from parents and families whose children were subjected to conversion therapy, including several whose testimony was submitted to the Supreme Court in Chiles v. Salazar.
Amicus Brief of Parents of Conversion Therapy Participants and Clergy Supporting Families Affected by Conversion Therapy -- National Center for Lesbian Rights, filed in Chiles v. Salazar (No. 24-539) -- The full sworn testimony submitted to the Supreme Court by Linda Robertson, Joyce Calvo, Martha Conley, Paulette Trimmer, and Robert Cottrell, detailing the harm conversion therapy caused their families and the constitutional importance of Colorado's law.
Recent posts
Chiles v. Salazar, Explained for Christian Parents Who Don't Have Time to Read a Legal Brief
Chiles v. Salazar is a Supreme Court case challenging Colorado's law protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed therapists.
Quick Takeaways
Chiles v. Salazar is a Supreme Court case challenging Colorado's law protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed therapists.
The therapist bringing the case, Kaley Chiles, is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization with a $104 million annual budget and a long record of anti-LGBTQ litigation.
Colorado's law applies only to licensed professionals. It does not restrict parents, clergy, or faith communities.
Four Christian families submitted sworn testimony to the Supreme Court describing the devastating harm conversion therapy caused their children and their relationships.
A ruling in Chiles's favor could strip states of the power to hold licensed therapists accountable for practicing discredited techniques on minors.
What the Case Is Actually About
In 2019, Colorado enacted the Minor Conversion Therapy Law, or MCTL, as part of the state's Mental Health Practice Act. The law prohibits licensed mental health professionals from practicing conversion therapy on clients under eighteen years old. It defines conversion therapy as any practice that attempts to change a minor's same-sex attraction or how they see themselves. It does not apply to pastors, counselors working outside a licensed clinical setting, or parents.
Kaley Chiles is a licensed therapist in Colorado who says she wants to offer this kind of counseling to clients who request it for religious reasons. She sued the state, arguing the law violates her First Amendment right to free speech. The case worked its way through the federal courts, with both the district court and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against her. The Supreme Court agreed to hear it.
Oral arguments were held in October 2025. A decision has not yet been issued.
The First Amendment Question, in Plain Terms
Here is the core legal question: is what a licensed therapist says to a child in a clinical session "speech" protected by the First Amendment, or is it "professional conduct" that the state can regulate?
This matters because states have long regulated what licensed professionals can and cannot do, including doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, and financial advisors. A doctor cannot prescribe a treatment they know causes harm just because the patient requests it. A lawyer cannot advise a client to commit a crime and call it free speech.
Colorado argues that the law governs professional conduct, in this case the practice of a specific discredited treatment, and only incidentally involves speech. The First Amendment, Colorado contends, does not protect a licensed professional's right to harm a patient regardless of the language used to do it.
Chiles argues that talk therapy is speech, and that restricting what a therapist can say to a willing client is a restriction on free expression.
The Supreme Court must decide which view applies.
Who Is Behind This Case
Kaley Chiles is the named plaintiff, but understanding who Alliance Defending Freedom is and what they have built gives important context for the case's stakes and ambitions.
ADF reported revenues of more than $104 million in 2022. It has played a role in at least 74 Supreme Court decisions and has been involved in drafting legislation across dozens of states on issues ranging from abortion access to transgender rights. It was the organization behind the Dobbs model legislation that ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade. The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated ADF as an anti-LGBTQ hate group.
This case did not arise organically from a therapist's personal legal concerns. It was designed and funded as a vehicle for a larger legal strategy. Christian parents evaluating the case deserve to understand whose interests are actually being served by it.
What Christian Families Testified
Perhaps the most important voices in this case are not the lawyers. Four Christian parents and one Evangelical pastor submitted sworn testimony to the Supreme Court opposing the therapist's position, as detailed in the amicus brief filed by parents and clergy in support of Colorado's law.
Linda Robertson lost her son Ryan in 2009 after years of conversion therapy led him to cope with shame through drug use. Joyce Calvo's daughter Alana, a devout young woman who had dreamed of becoming a nun, died by suicide in 2019 after being directed to conversion therapy through her Archdiocese. Martha Conley, the mother of Garrard Conley whose story became the memoir and film Boy Erased, describes watching conversion therapy send her son into a deep depression. Paulette Trimmer's son was taught by a conversion therapy program that his parents' failings had caused him to be gay, fracturing their relationship for years.
All four parents remain people of faith. All four now urge other Christian parents not to make the same choice they did. Their testimony describes why this case matters right now for families in every state.
What Each Possible Outcome Means for Families
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Colorado, state laws protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed practitioners remain intact. Families in protected states keep those safeguards. Other states retain the authority to enact similar laws.
If the Court rules in favor of Chiles, those protections are weakened or eliminated. Licensed therapists in every state could gain the right to practice conversion therapy on minors, even in states that have explicitly prohibited it, by framing the practice as protected speech. Families would lose a key layer of accountability for what happens to their children in private clinical settings.
For Christian parents, the practical question is straightforward: do you want licensed professionals to be held to standards of care when working with your children, or not? That is what is actually at stake.
What Stays Available to Families Regardless of the Ruling
Whatever the Court decides, some things do not change. Parents can seek pastoral guidance. Churches can offer spiritual support. Families can have honest, faith-rooted conversations at home about hard questions. None of that is before the Court.
What is before the Court is whether licensed therapists, who hold state-issued credentials and have special access to vulnerable minors, can be regulated in what they practice. Families who have shared their stories publicly about what conversion therapy cost them did so to help other parents avoid the same harm. Their testimony is the clearest guide available for what this case means beyond the legal briefs.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Chiles v. Salazar in simple terms?
A Colorado therapist represented by Alliance Defending Freedom is asking the Supreme Court to strike down Colorado's law preventing licensed therapists from practicing conversion therapy on minors. She argues the law violates her free speech rights. Colorado argues it regulates professional medical conduct, not speech. A decision is pending.
Does this case affect my right to get pastoral counseling for my child?
No. Colorado's law, and the case challenging it, applies exclusively to licensed mental health professionals operating in a clinical capacity. Pastors, youth ministers, and faith communities are not affected by this law or this case in any state.
Who is Alliance Defending Freedom and why are they involved?
ADF is a conservative Christian legal organization with revenues exceeding $104 million annually. They represent Kaley Chiles and are using this case to pursue a broader legal strategy aimed at limiting states' ability to regulate conversion therapy. They have been involved in shaping legislation across dozens of states and multiple Supreme Court cases.
What did the Christian families who testified say?
Four Christian parents submitted sworn testimony describing in detail how conversion therapy harmed their children and shattered their family relationships. Every parent expressed profound regret. Two lost their children entirely: one to drug overdose, one to suicide.
When will the Supreme Court issue a decision?
Oral arguments were heard in October 2025. The Court typically issues decisions by the end of its term in late June or early July. A decision is expected by summer 2026.
Sources and Further Reading
Who Is Alliance Defending Freedom? A Guide for Christian Families -- Conversion Truth for Families -- CT4F's overview of ADF's history, litigation strategy, funding, and track record, providing essential context for understanding who is driving the Chiles v. Salazar case and why.
Why Chiles v. Salazar Matters Right Now -- Conversion Truth for Families -- CT4F's explainer on the stakes of the pending Supreme Court decision for families in states with and without existing conversion therapy protections.
Real Stories From Christian Families Affected by Conversion Therapy -- Conversion Truth for Families -- First-person accounts from parents and families whose children were subjected to conversion therapy, including several whose testimony was submitted to the Supreme Court in Chiles v. Salazar.
Amicus Brief of Parents of Conversion Therapy Participants and Clergy Supporting Families Affected by Conversion Therapy -- National Center for Lesbian Rights, filed in Chiles v. Salazar (No. 24-539) -- The full sworn testimony submitted to the Supreme Court by Linda Robertson, Joyce Calvo, Martha Conley, Paulette Trimmer, and Robert Cottrell, detailing the harm conversion therapy caused their families and the constitutional importance of Colorado's law.
Recent posts
Chiles v. Salazar, Explained for Christian Parents Who Don't Have Time to Read a Legal Brief
Chiles v. Salazar is a Supreme Court case challenging Colorado's law protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed therapists.
Quick Takeaways
Chiles v. Salazar is a Supreme Court case challenging Colorado's law protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed therapists.
The therapist bringing the case, Kaley Chiles, is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization with a $104 million annual budget and a long record of anti-LGBTQ litigation.
Colorado's law applies only to licensed professionals. It does not restrict parents, clergy, or faith communities.
Four Christian families submitted sworn testimony to the Supreme Court describing the devastating harm conversion therapy caused their children and their relationships.
A ruling in Chiles's favor could strip states of the power to hold licensed therapists accountable for practicing discredited techniques on minors.
What the Case Is Actually About
In 2019, Colorado enacted the Minor Conversion Therapy Law, or MCTL, as part of the state's Mental Health Practice Act. The law prohibits licensed mental health professionals from practicing conversion therapy on clients under eighteen years old. It defines conversion therapy as any practice that attempts to change a minor's same-sex attraction or how they see themselves. It does not apply to pastors, counselors working outside a licensed clinical setting, or parents.
Kaley Chiles is a licensed therapist in Colorado who says she wants to offer this kind of counseling to clients who request it for religious reasons. She sued the state, arguing the law violates her First Amendment right to free speech. The case worked its way through the federal courts, with both the district court and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against her. The Supreme Court agreed to hear it.
Oral arguments were held in October 2025. A decision has not yet been issued.
The First Amendment Question, in Plain Terms
Here is the core legal question: is what a licensed therapist says to a child in a clinical session "speech" protected by the First Amendment, or is it "professional conduct" that the state can regulate?
This matters because states have long regulated what licensed professionals can and cannot do, including doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, and financial advisors. A doctor cannot prescribe a treatment they know causes harm just because the patient requests it. A lawyer cannot advise a client to commit a crime and call it free speech.
Colorado argues that the law governs professional conduct, in this case the practice of a specific discredited treatment, and only incidentally involves speech. The First Amendment, Colorado contends, does not protect a licensed professional's right to harm a patient regardless of the language used to do it.
Chiles argues that talk therapy is speech, and that restricting what a therapist can say to a willing client is a restriction on free expression.
The Supreme Court must decide which view applies.
Who Is Behind This Case
Kaley Chiles is the named plaintiff, but understanding who Alliance Defending Freedom is and what they have built gives important context for the case's stakes and ambitions.
ADF reported revenues of more than $104 million in 2022. It has played a role in at least 74 Supreme Court decisions and has been involved in drafting legislation across dozens of states on issues ranging from abortion access to transgender rights. It was the organization behind the Dobbs model legislation that ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade. The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated ADF as an anti-LGBTQ hate group.
This case did not arise organically from a therapist's personal legal concerns. It was designed and funded as a vehicle for a larger legal strategy. Christian parents evaluating the case deserve to understand whose interests are actually being served by it.
What Christian Families Testified
Perhaps the most important voices in this case are not the lawyers. Four Christian parents and one Evangelical pastor submitted sworn testimony to the Supreme Court opposing the therapist's position, as detailed in the amicus brief filed by parents and clergy in support of Colorado's law.
Linda Robertson lost her son Ryan in 2009 after years of conversion therapy led him to cope with shame through drug use. Joyce Calvo's daughter Alana, a devout young woman who had dreamed of becoming a nun, died by suicide in 2019 after being directed to conversion therapy through her Archdiocese. Martha Conley, the mother of Garrard Conley whose story became the memoir and film Boy Erased, describes watching conversion therapy send her son into a deep depression. Paulette Trimmer's son was taught by a conversion therapy program that his parents' failings had caused him to be gay, fracturing their relationship for years.
All four parents remain people of faith. All four now urge other Christian parents not to make the same choice they did. Their testimony describes why this case matters right now for families in every state.
What Each Possible Outcome Means for Families
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Colorado, state laws protecting minors from conversion therapy by licensed practitioners remain intact. Families in protected states keep those safeguards. Other states retain the authority to enact similar laws.
If the Court rules in favor of Chiles, those protections are weakened or eliminated. Licensed therapists in every state could gain the right to practice conversion therapy on minors, even in states that have explicitly prohibited it, by framing the practice as protected speech. Families would lose a key layer of accountability for what happens to their children in private clinical settings.
For Christian parents, the practical question is straightforward: do you want licensed professionals to be held to standards of care when working with your children, or not? That is what is actually at stake.
What Stays Available to Families Regardless of the Ruling
Whatever the Court decides, some things do not change. Parents can seek pastoral guidance. Churches can offer spiritual support. Families can have honest, faith-rooted conversations at home about hard questions. None of that is before the Court.
What is before the Court is whether licensed therapists, who hold state-issued credentials and have special access to vulnerable minors, can be regulated in what they practice. Families who have shared their stories publicly about what conversion therapy cost them did so to help other parents avoid the same harm. Their testimony is the clearest guide available for what this case means beyond the legal briefs.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Chiles v. Salazar in simple terms?
A Colorado therapist represented by Alliance Defending Freedom is asking the Supreme Court to strike down Colorado's law preventing licensed therapists from practicing conversion therapy on minors. She argues the law violates her free speech rights. Colorado argues it regulates professional medical conduct, not speech. A decision is pending.
Does this case affect my right to get pastoral counseling for my child?
No. Colorado's law, and the case challenging it, applies exclusively to licensed mental health professionals operating in a clinical capacity. Pastors, youth ministers, and faith communities are not affected by this law or this case in any state.
Who is Alliance Defending Freedom and why are they involved?
ADF is a conservative Christian legal organization with revenues exceeding $104 million annually. They represent Kaley Chiles and are using this case to pursue a broader legal strategy aimed at limiting states' ability to regulate conversion therapy. They have been involved in shaping legislation across dozens of states and multiple Supreme Court cases.
What did the Christian families who testified say?
Four Christian parents submitted sworn testimony describing in detail how conversion therapy harmed their children and shattered their family relationships. Every parent expressed profound regret. Two lost their children entirely: one to drug overdose, one to suicide.
When will the Supreme Court issue a decision?
Oral arguments were heard in October 2025. The Court typically issues decisions by the end of its term in late June or early July. A decision is expected by summer 2026.
Sources and Further Reading
Who Is Alliance Defending Freedom? A Guide for Christian Families -- Conversion Truth for Families -- CT4F's overview of ADF's history, litigation strategy, funding, and track record, providing essential context for understanding who is driving the Chiles v. Salazar case and why.
Why Chiles v. Salazar Matters Right Now -- Conversion Truth for Families -- CT4F's explainer on the stakes of the pending Supreme Court decision for families in states with and without existing conversion therapy protections.
Real Stories From Christian Families Affected by Conversion Therapy -- Conversion Truth for Families -- First-person accounts from parents and families whose children were subjected to conversion therapy, including several whose testimony was submitted to the Supreme Court in Chiles v. Salazar.
Amicus Brief of Parents of Conversion Therapy Participants and Clergy Supporting Families Affected by Conversion Therapy -- National Center for Lesbian Rights, filed in Chiles v. Salazar (No. 24-539) -- The full sworn testimony submitted to the Supreme Court by Linda Robertson, Joyce Calvo, Martha Conley, Paulette Trimmer, and Robert Cottrell, detailing the harm conversion therapy caused their families and the constitutional importance of Colorado's law.