Supreme Court Tightens Standards in Chiles v. Salazar Ruling
Supreme Court ruling in Chiles v. Salazar tightens scrutiny on professional speech laws.
Why it matters: This ruling redefines how courts evaluate state laws affecting professional speech, especially those targeting contentious practices like conversion therapy.
- Supreme Court ruled 8-1, with Justice Gorsuch leading the decision.
- State regulations on professional speech now require compelling justification.
- Justice Jackson dissented; concurrences by Justices Kagan and Sotomayor highlight diverse views.
- Ruling could impact similar laws, particularly affecting conversion therapy regulations.
The Supreme Court's decision in Chiles v. Salazar, delivered on March 31, 2026, significantly alters the landscape for state laws governing professional speech. The Court, through an 8-1 decision led by Justice Neil Gorsuch, overturned the Tenth Circuit's approval of Colorado's Minor Conversion Therapy Law, marking a landmark interpretation of First Amendment rights with respect to professional conduct.
The ruling concluded that state laws enforcing viewpoint-based restrictions on professional speech must undergo 'heightened scrutiny.' This applies especially to contentious issues, setting a high bar for states to justify restrictions by demonstrating a compelling interest. Justice Kagan's and Sotomayor's concise concurrences on March 31, 2026, elaborate on different perspectives within the Court, while Justice Jackson’s dissent underscores the ongoing debate about the boundaries of protected speech and state regulation.
Colorado's law specifically banned licensed professionals from conducting conversion therapy on minors, a practice that has seen varied legal treatment across states due to its controversial nature. The Court's decision mandates that laws like Colorado's must be critically assessed for constitutional validity, likely influencing similar statutes nationwide.
Additionally, the case is included as an educational tool in the Barnett/Blackman supplement edited by Josh Blackman, a noted legal scholar and commentator, aiming to elucidate judicial treatment of speech and viewpoint discrimination within First Amendment jurisprudence.
By the numbers:
- 8-1 — Supreme Court ruling against Colorado's law.
- March 31, 2026 — Date of the Supreme Court decision.
What's next: Watch for challenges to existing laws on professional speech, especially regarding conversion therapy.