Chiles v. Salazar
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Chiles v. Salazar and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Chiles v. Salazar.
Kaley Chiles challenged a Colorado law prohibiting conversion therapy for minors, arguing it violated her First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court found the law regulated speech based on viewpoint, requiring strict scrutiny. The Court reversed the lower courts' decisions, emphasizing the protection of free speech for licensed professionals.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Chiles v. Salazar.
The Court held that Colorado's law banning conversion therapy, as applied to Ms. Chiles's talk therapy, regulates speech based on viewpoint, requiring rigorous First Amendment scrutiny.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Chiles v. Salazar. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Free Speech is relevant to Chiles v. Salazar
The case centers on whether Colorado's law regulating conversion therapy constitutes a viewpoint-based restriction on speech, which implicates the First Amendment's protection of free speech.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Colorado’s law banning conversion therapy, as applied to Ms. Chiles’s talk therapy, regulates speech based on viewpoint, and the lower courts erred by failing to apply sufficiently rigorous First Amendment scrutiny.
-
Why Standing is relevant to Chiles v. Salazar
The case discusses whether Ms. Chiles had Article III standing to pursue her challenge, which is a threshold issue in federal court cases.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Both the district court and the Tenth Circuit determined that Ms. Chiles had Article III standing to pursue her as-applied pre-enforcement challenge.
-
Why Substantive Due Process is relevant to Chiles v. Salazar
The case involves the regulation of professional conduct and speech, which can implicate substantive due process rights related to personal autonomy and professional practice.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Ms. Chiles seeks to help them reach their stated objectives. And she employs only talk therapy.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Chiles v. Salazar that support the summary and concepts above.
Colorado’s law banning conversion therapy, as applied to Ms. Chiles’s talk therapy, regulates speech based on viewpoint.
The First Amendment protects the inalienable right of every individual to decide for himself “how best to speak.”
Laws like Colorado’s, which suppress speech based on viewpoint, represent an egregious assault on both commitments.