2026-03-31T14:10:11.662Z / 路透社
作者：约翰·克鲁泽尔
2026年3月31日 世界协调时14:10 更新于17分钟前
节点运行失败
美国最高法院大楼，美国华盛顿特区，2026年3月20日。路透社/内森·霍华德 购买授权许可
- 概要
- 超过二十个州禁止或限制此类疗法
- 基督教治疗师以言论自由为由挑战禁令
- 投票结果为8比1，自由派大法官杰克逊投下反对票
- 下级法院将该禁令认定为职业行为监管措施
华盛顿，3月31日（路透社）——美国最高法院周二驳回了科罗拉多州一项禁止心理治疗师对未成年LGBT群体使用旨在改变其性取向或性别认同的“转化”谈话疗法的法律，支持一名基督教持证咨询师的主张，认为该禁令侵犯了言论自由权利。
这份8比1的裁决由保守派大法官尼尔·戈萨奇撰写，驳回了科罗拉多州的论点——该州认为其法律监管的是职业行为，而非受保护的言论。
《路透社伊朗简报》新闻简报将为您提供伊朗局势的最新动态与分析，点击此处订阅。
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
大法官们推翻了下级法院的裁决，此前下级法院支持了该法律。此案由咨询师卡莉·蔡尔斯提起，她认为该法律违反了美国宪法第一修正案对言论自由不受政府压制的保护。
最高法院保留了该法律可能适用于某些形式的转化疗法的可能性，包括所谓的“厌恶型”身体干预，但不适用于本案所涉及的咨询师的言论。
“审查式政府”
“科罗拉多州针对转化疗法的法律并不仅仅禁止身体干预。在这类案件中，它会基于观点审查言论，”戈萨奇写道。“科罗拉多州可能认为其政策对公共健康与安全至关重要。毫无疑问，历史上审查式政府也曾抱有同样想法。但第一修正案是一道屏障，抵御任何在这个国家强制推行思想或言论正统的企图。”
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
大法官们指示下级法院根据更严格的第一修正案标准对该法律进行进一步审理。
共和党籍总统唐纳德·特朗普的政府在这场针对该法律的挑战中支持蔡尔斯。
美国最高法院目前拥有6比3的保守派多数席位，自由派大法官凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊是唯一的反对者。
这场争议的核心是科罗拉多州禁止其认定为不安全且无效的医疗行为的权力，与第一修正案言论自由保护之间的冲突。
杰克逊表示，各州有权监管由州执照专业人员向患者提供的医疗服务，科罗拉多州“限制危险疗法”的决定——尽管这会附带涉及从业者的言论——并不违宪。
“法院得出相反结论，是误读了我们的先例，既无原则也不可行，最终将对那些依赖各州为保护公共健康而监管医疗行业这一长期公认职责的人来说站不住脚，”杰克逊写道。
科罗拉多州是全美二十多个州和哥伦比亚特区之一，这些地区均限制或禁止针对18岁以下患者的转化疗法。
民主党籍科罗拉多州州长贾里德·波利斯是美国首位当选州长的公开同性恋者，也是转化疗法的批评者，他于2019年签署该法案成为法律。波利斯周二表示，他正在评估这项裁决，并致力于找出如何在科罗拉多州更好地保护LGBT青年与言论自由。
“转化疗法毫无效果，会严重伤害青少年，科罗拉多人在将自己辛苦赚来的钱交给这类骗局前应提高警惕，”波利斯说。“我们正在为科罗拉多州每个人都能做自己的权利而奋斗。”
该法律禁止持证心理健康服务提供者试图以预设结果改变未成年人的性取向或性别认同，每一项违规行为最高可处以5000美元罚款。这包括试图减少或消除同性吸引力，或改变“行为或性别表达”。
包括美国心理学会在内的医疗团体援引研究表明，此类谈话疗法与诸多危害相关，包括跨性别青少年自杀或离家出走的可能性上升。
“接纳、支持与理解”
科罗拉多州法律确实允许为“正在经历性别过渡的人”提供“协助”，以及以“接纳、支持与理解”为核心的“身份探索与发展”相关疗法。
蔡尔斯是一名执业基督徒，她曾表示“相信人们在遵循上帝的设计生活时会蓬勃发展，包括与其生理性别相符的生活”。蔡尔斯由联盟辩护基金代理，这是一个保守派宗教权利组织，此前曾代表一名基于基督教信仰拒绝为同性伴侣服务的面包师和婚礼网站设计师赢得高调的最高法院案件。
联盟辩护基金的律师吉姆·坎贝尔对周二的裁决表示欢迎。
“孩子们理应得到真正的帮助，让他们确信自己的身体并非错误，他们生来就很棒。美国最高法院今天的裁决是言论自由、常识以及 desperate to help their children的家庭的重大胜利，”坎贝尔说。“各州不能压制那些帮助年轻人适应自身身体的自愿对话。”
支持该法律的人权运动LGBT权利组织主席凯利·罗宾逊表示，最高法院的“鲁莽裁决意味着更多美国儿童将遭受痛苦”。
“法院将言论自由武器化，优先考虑反LGBTQ+偏见，而非儿童的安全、健康与福祉。所谓的‘转化疗法’是伪科学，而非真正的治疗，”罗宾逊说。
“我们仍致力于保护儿童免受这些虐待行为的伤害，这些行为会拆散家庭，并将继续与我们的联盟伙伴合作，确保没有孩子在寻求更好地了解自己并成长的帮助时，不得不遭受内疚、胁迫和拒绝，”罗宾逊补充道。
约翰·克鲁泽尔报道；安德鲁·钟补充报道；威尔·邓汉姆编辑
我们的准则：汤姆森路透社信任原则。
US Supreme Court rejects Colorado’s ban on LGBT ‘conversion’ talk therapy
2026-03-31T14:10:11.662Z / Reuters
By John Kruzel
March 31, 2026 2:10 PM UTC Updated 17 mins ago
节点运行失败
U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 20, 2026. REUTERS/Nathan Howard Purchase Licensing Rights
- More than two dozen states ban or limit this therapy
- Christian therapist challenged ban on free speech grounds
- Ruling was 8-1, with liberal Justice Jackson dissenting
- Lower courts upheld ban as professional conduct regulation
WASHINGTON, March 31 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday a Colorado law that banned psychotherapists from using “conversion” talk therapy intended to change an LGBT minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity, siding with a Christian licensed counselor in casting the prohibition as an intrusion on free speech rights.
The 8-1 ruling, authored by conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, rejected Colorado’s argument that its law regulated professional conduct, not protected speech.
The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
The justices reversed a lower court’s decision that had upheld the law in a case brought by counselor Kaley Chiles, who argued that it violated the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections against government abridgment of free speech.
The Supreme Court held open the possibility that the law could apply to certain forms of conversion therapy, including so-called “aversive” physical interventions, but not to the counselor’s speech at issue in the case.
‘CENSORIOUS GOVERNMENTS’
“Colorado’s law addressing conversion therapy does not just ban physical interventions. In cases like this, it censors speech based on viewpoint,” Gorsuch wrote. “Colorado may regard its policy as essential to public health and safety. Certainly, censorious governments throughout history have believed the same. But the First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.”
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
The justices directed the lower court to conduct further proceedings applying a more rigorous First Amendment standard to the law.
Republican President Donald Trump’s administration backed Chiles in the challenge to the law.
The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority, and liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter.
The dispute pitted Colorado’s authority to forbid a healthcare practice that it called unsafe and ineffective against First Amendment speech protections.
Jackson said that states have the power to regulate medical treatments provided by state-licensed professionals to patients, and Colorado’s decision to “restrict a dangerous therapy” that incidentally involves providers’ speech is not unconstitutional.
“In concluding otherwise, the court’s opinion misreads our precedents, is unprincipled and unworkable, and will eventually prove untenable for those who rely upon the long-recognized responsibility of states to regulate the medical profession for the protection of public health,” Jackson wrote.
Colorado is among more than two dozen states and the District of Columbia that restrict or prohibit conversion therapy for patients younger than 18.
Democratic Colorado Governor Jared Polis, the first openly gay man to be elected as a U.S. state governor and a critic of conversion therapy, signed the measure into law in 2019. Polis said on Tuesday he was evaluating the ruling and working to figure out how to better protect LGBT youths and free speech in Colorado.
“Conversion therapy doesn’t work, can seriously harm youth, and Coloradans should beware before turning over their hard-earned money to a scam,” Polis said. “We are fighting for everyone’s right to be who you are in our Colorado for all.”
The law prohibited licensed mental healthcare providers from seeking to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity according to a predetermined outcome, with each violation punishable by a fine of up to $5,000. This includes attempts to reduce or eliminate same-sex attraction or change “behaviors or gender expressions.”
Medical groups such as the American Psychological Association have cited studies showing that this type of talk therapy has been associated with harms including an increased likelihood of transgender minors attempting suicide or running away from home.
‘ACCEPTANCE, SUPPORT AND UNDERSTANDING’
Colorado’s law does permit treatments that provide “assistance to a person undergoing gender transition,” as well as therapies centered on “acceptance, support and understanding” for “identity exploration and development.”
Chiles, a practicing Christian, has said she “believes that people flourish when they live consistently with God’s design, including their biological sex.” Chiles was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative religious rights group that previously secured high-profile Supreme Court victories on behalf of a baker and wedding website designer who refused, based on their Christian beliefs, to serve gay couples.
Alliance Defending Freedom lawyer Jim Campbell welcomed Tuesday’s ruling.
“Kids deserve real help affirming that their bodies are not a mistake and that they are wonderfully made. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today is a significant win for free speech, common sense, and families desperate to help their children,” Campbell said. “States cannot silence voluntary conversations that help young people seeking to grow comfortable with their bodies.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign LGBT rights group that filed a brief in support of the law, said the Supreme Court’s “reckless decision means more American kids will suffer.”
“The court has weaponized free speech in order to prioritize anti-LGBTQ+ bias over the safety, health and wellbeing of children. So-called ‘conversion therapy’ is pseudoscience, not real therapy,” Robinson said.
“We remain committed to protecting children against these abusive practices that tear apart families and will continue to work alongside our coalition partners to ensure that no kid has to be subjected to guilt, coercion and rejection as they seek help to better understand themselves and grow,” Robinson added.
Reporting by John Kruzel; Additional reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.