By Stuart Gaffney and John Lewis –
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in a conservative Christian therapist’s challenge to Colorado’s ban on LGBTQ+ conversion therapy. At issue in the case, Chiles v. Salazar, is a Colorado statute, similar to those of over 20 other states, which prohibits licensed healthcare providers from engaging in “any practice or treatment” whose purpose is to change a minor’s “gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”
As Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson told the Court, conversion therapy is a completely discredited practice that often causes devastating and long-lasting harm to its victims⎯namely LGBTIQ+ people⎯and their loved ones. Common negative outcomes for those who undergo it include serious depression and suicidal ideation, particularly severe in minors subjected to it. Stephenson explained that “people have been trying to do conversion therapy for a hundred years with no record of success,” noting that “no study … has ever shown that it has any chance of being efficacious.”
She further detailed how “all of the theories underlying conversion therapy” through the years have been proven to be false. From “homosexuality is a pathology that we need to treat” to “homosexuality is caused by trauma” to “homosexuality is caused by a relationship you had with your parents”—all have been “debunked.”
Colorado’s law is a measured response to the harms conversion therapy causes. It only prohibits the practice when performed on minors—not on consenting adults. It allows life coaches, not subject to state licensure, as well as clergy and people involved in religious ministry, to engage in the practice. It permits people to advocate freely for conversion therapy in public debate and discussion. What the law prohibits is state-licensed healthcare professionals, who “owe fiduciary duties” to their patients and are “subject to malpractice,” just “to say whatever they want to say” in their provision of professional care to patients, instead of providing treatment that meets the professional “standard of care.” Conversion therapy unquestionably fails to meet that standard.
Despite this reality, many legal observers believe after hearing the oral argument that the Court appears poised to rule against the Colorado law when it issues its decision sometime next year. We will not discuss now the implications of various possible rulings the Court may issue, not only because predictions may prove wrong, but also because the scope and precise wording of the Court’s decision could greatly influence its effect and the wisest actions to take in response to it.
But one thing we do know now is that amplifying the voices of conversion therapy survivors, who have bravely spoken out publicly about their experiences, is invaluable to ending the practice, not only in professional settings at issue before the Supreme Court, but also in any other context it is practiced. After listening to the oral argument, we sadly found that one thing lacking was the actual voices of just such people.
One of them is Ryan Kendall, who boldly stepped forward years ago to offer his story to the nation and is now one of the leading advocates in efforts to end conversion therapy. Fifteen years ago, Kendall was a star witness in the Proposition 8 trial in San Francisco because the fact that being LGBTIQ+ is an innate aspect of who we are as people was relevant to the issue of marriage equality.
On the stand, Kendall courageously described some of the most vulnerable moments of his life, telling about his parents’ horrible reaction to discovering he was gay and about his ordeal with forced conversion therapy as a minor. We remember how some in the courtroom audibly gasped as they heard Ryan recount what he had gone through. Judge Vaughan Walker, who presided over the case and is gay, later characterized Kendall’s testimony as “the most touching testimony of the trial” ⎯going on to reveal that he himself had undergone conversion therapy as well.
After the Prop. 8 trial, Kendall testified before numerous state legislatures about the harms of conversion therapy. And when the Supreme Court decided to take the current case, Kendall stepped up once again. He, along with other conversion therapy survivors, submitted an amicus brief to the Court, detailing their real-life personal experiences.
As the brief describes, Kendall grew up “in an evangelical Christian community in Colorado Springs, Colorado,” and he shares how his “parents desperately sought to ‘fix’ him by sending him to a Christian therapist.” The result of approximately 18 months of conversion therapy was, of course, no change in Kendall’s sexual orientation, but instead utter pain and suffering.
Conversion therapy left Kendall’s family in shambles and rendered Kendall “severely depressed and contemplating suicide.” At age 16, Kendall “dropped out of high school and ran away from home,” experiencing “periods of drug abuse and homelessness.” As a teen, Kendall “internalized the message from conversion therapy that he was defective and unlovable.”
But, with time, extraordinary hard work, and perseverance, as well as support from people who truly embraced him, Ryan graduated summa cum laude from Columbia University, before earning his law degree from UCLA. He is now an accomplished civil rights lawyer. Nevertheless, some negative effects of conversion therapy remain with him and his family members. Tragically, many others are never able to overcome the feeling Kendall describes of being “untethered and alone” that the practice instills in them as young people.
As the amicus brief states, Kendall “shar[ed] his experience” with our nation’s highest court in the hope that it “will help other families avoid these devastating outcomes.” Kendall’s actions represent the LGBTIQ+ community at its very best—when we do everything at our disposal to try to protect others from needlessly suffering in ways we have and to enable them to find well-being and true happiness and to flourish just as they are as queer people. Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules in the Colorado case, we must continue to do exactly that in every way we can.
John Lewis and Stuart Gaffney, together for over three decades, were plaintiffs in the California case for equal marriage rights decided by the California Supreme Court in 2008. Their leadership in the grassroots organization Marriage Equality USA contributed in 2015 to making same-sex marriage legal nationwide.
6/26 and Beyond
Published on October 23, 2025
Recent Comments