The Moral and Financial Harm of Conversion Therapy: Why Chiles v. Salazar Matters for All of Us

One of the most harmful manifestations of discrimination is so-called “conversion therapy,” which is a debunked and dangerous practice that falsely claims to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity. As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear Chiles v. Salazar, a case challenging Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy” and the constitutionality of Colorado’s Minor Conversion Therapy Law (MCTL), we face a pivotal moment. The central legal issue concerns whether Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy for minors infringes upon the First Amendment rights of licensed mental health professionals.

The Harm of Conversion Therapy

Conversion therapy is not therapy, it’s abuse. According to a study published in JAMA Pediatrics, LGBTQ+ youth who undergo conversion therapy are more than twice as likely to attempt suicide compared to their peers who have not been subjected to such practices. Decades of research by every major medical and mental health organization in the United States have shown that attempts to “cure” people of being LGBTQ+ are not only ineffective, but actively harmful. The American Psychiatric Association and American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry have all condemned conversion therapy, citing increased rates of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and suicide among those subjected to it.

Conversion therapy is more than a moral failure; it is a violation of basic human rights. It tells young people that their core identities are unacceptable, often within the very religious communities that should be their safe havens. For many, this trauma lasts a lifetime.

Religious Freedom Doesn’t Mean a License to Harm

The Constitution protects the free exercise of religion, but it also prohibits the establishment of religion. Chiles v. Salazar poses a very dangerous threat to this protected right and the LGBTQ+ community. Chiles contends that the MCTL infringes upon her First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion. Supporters of conversion therapy often claim religious freedom as their defense, but that could not be further from the truth. Religious freedom is about the right to believe and worship according to your conscience, not the right to use the government to impose your beliefs on others. 

Colorado’s lower court upheld the MCTL, viewing the law as serving legitimate state interests in protecting minors from harmful and ineffective therapeutic practices and maintaining the integrity of the mental health profession. In March the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, to address the constitutional questions surrounding the regulation of professional speech and the balance between state regulatory power and free speech rights within professional contexts.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Chiles v. Salazar could determine whether that line still means anything. Will the Court uphold the principle that the government must not fund religious coercion? Or will it open the door to greater entanglement of church and state at the expense of vulnerable youth?

Standing for Justice and Dignity

Interfaith Alliance joins a broad coalition of religious, civil rights, and LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations in urging the Supreme Court to recognize the clear harm done when the government funds coercive, pseudoscientific practices in the name of faith. 

The stakes in Chiles v. Salazar could not be higher. But neither will our resolve. We are proud to stand with LGBTQ+ youth, with responsible stewards of public resources, and with all those who believe that faith should be a force for healing, not for harm.