The SCOTUS Decision in Chiles v. Salazar: What Texas LPCs Need to Know

On March 31, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark 8-1 ruling in Chiles v. Salazar. For Licensed Professional Counselors (LPCs) in Texas and across the nation, this decision marks a seismic shift in how the law distinguishes between "professional conduct" and "protected speech" within the counseling room.

If you are a practitioner in Texas, it is vital to understand how this ruling impacts your First Amendment rights and your regulatory obligations under the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council (BHEC).

The Core of the Case

The case involved Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor who challenged a Colorado law prohibiting licensed professionals from engaging in "conversion therapy" with minors. Colorado argued the law was a regulation of professional conduct (medical treatment), which allows the state broad oversight.

However, the Supreme Court disagreed. Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch clarified that when therapy consists entirely of the "spoken word," it is the quintessential form of protected speech.

Key Takeaways from the Ruling

• Strict Scrutiny Applied: The Court ruled that laws restricting "talk therapy" based on the counselor’s viewpoint must survive "strict scrutiny." This is the highest legal standard, requiring the government to prove the law is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.

  
  

• Speech vs. Conduct: The Court rejected the idea that speech becomes "conduct" simply because a state labels it "treatment" or "modality." If the regulation restricts what a counselor can say based on the content of those words, it is a speech restriction.

  
  

• Viewpoint Neutrality: The Court noted that Colorado’s law was not viewpoint-neutral; it allowed speech that "affirmed" a minor’s gender identity but banned speech that sought to "change" it. This "orthodoxy of views" was deemed an assault on the First Amendment.

  
  

Why This Matters for Texas LPCs

While the case originated in Colorado, the precedent is federal and immediately impacts how Texas laws are interpreted.

Protection for "Talk Therapy"

For Texas LPCs, this ruling provides a robust shield for the verbal aspects of the therapeutic relationship. It suggests that the state cannot easily dictate the specific goals or content of your conversations with clients if those conversations are purely speech-based.

Intersection with Texas SB 14 and BHEC

Texas has its own complex landscape regarding gender-affirming care. Recently, Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an opinion (KP-0518) stating that the prohibitions in SB 14 (regarding gender transition procedures for minors) apply to mental health providers who "facilitate" such treatments.

The Chiles decision creates a potential tension:

• The State may argue that certain counseling "facilitates" prohibited medical procedures.

  
  

• The Supreme Court has now affirmed that your words in a session are protected speech, not just incidental conduct.

  
  

Professional Liability and Ethics

Despite this ruling, the Court did not validate the efficacy of conversion therapy, nor did it strip states of their right to regulate harmful physical treatments. Organizations like the American Psychiatric Association (APA) have already issued statements reiterating that efforts to change sexual orientation or gender identity can be psychologically harmful.

Note for Practitioners: While your speech may have higher protection now, your ethical obligations to "do no harm" and follow the ACA/LPC Code of Ethics remain unchanged. Professional malpractice remains a risk if a client is harmed by a treatment plan, regardless of whether that plan is speech-based.

Moving Forward: Practical Advice

1. Review Your Informed Consent: Ensure your informed consent documents clearly outline your therapeutic approach and goals, especially when working with minors and families.

2. Document with Precision: In light of the ruling and Texas's specific state laws, your documentation should clearly reflect the nature of the "talk therapy" provided.

3. Stay Tuned to BHEC: Watch for official guidance from the Texas State Board of Examiners of Professional Counselors. They will likely need to issue a memo clarifying how they will harmonize the Chiles ruling with existing Texas statutes.

Chiles v. Salazar is a victory for the First Amendment rights of clinicians, but it introduces a new era of legal complexity. As the "marketplace of ideas" enters the counseling room, our commitment to client welfare must remain our North Star.

...supervision matters!

Disclaimer: This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. LPCs should consult with a qualified attorney regarding specific compliance and liability concerns.