Why SCOTUS Ruled 8–1 Against Colorado's 'Conversion Therapy' Ban

The article centers the Supreme Court's majority reasoning and Gorsuch's First Amendment framing with minimal pushback, presenting the 8–1 decision as largely conclusive while treating the lone dissent (Jackson) as outlier rather than substantive counterargument. Language is technically neutral but structurally privileges the majority view—calling the decision a 'judicial death sentence' for Colorado's law and noting Gorsuch's 'none-too-subtle hint' assumes the reader will accept the Court's logic.

Primary voices: state or recognized government, academic or expert

• This article does not address the medical and psychological consensus that conversion therapy is harmful to minors.
• This article does not include voices from LGBTQ+ advocates or medical/mental health organizations that support conversion therapy bans.
• This article does not discuss the distinction between restricting harmful practices on minors versus restricting adult speech.