Counselors are increasingly winning the freedom to provide client-directed talk therapy for those who want help with becoming more comfortable with their biological sex after a recent court victory in Missouri. Experts say the two therapists in the state will likely prevail in light of newly solidified Supreme Court precedent, which protects the rights of counselors to provide the therapy services that clients want, particularly those who want help in moving away from transgender ideology.

Local ordinances in the Kansas City, Mo. area passed in 2019 and 2023 outlawed the practice of simple talk therapy provided by licensed counselors in order to help clients who express the desire to become more comfortable with their biological sex or to move away from same-sex attractions. The counseling has been derisively labeled “conversion therapy” by LGBT activists, who claim the therapy is “dangerous” and “life-threatening” without providing any proof or examples.

Last month, Kansas City passed a revised version of its therapy ban after the Supreme Court ruled in Chiles v. Salazar in March that an almost identical Colorado law to Kansas City’s violated the free speech of counselors. The revised law would ban payment to counselors for “non-medically sanctioned, dangerous and life-threatening” therapies. But legal experts pointed out that the new language is vague and still open to legal challenge.

Wyatt Bury and Pamela Eisenrich, two Christian counselors represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), filed suit against the ordinance before the Supreme Court’s Chiles v. Salazar decision, and their claim of First Amendment free speech violations was dismissed by a district court. But after the Chiles decision was handed down, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed the dismissal, remanding the case back to the district court in light of Chiles.

Legal experts like Suzanne Beecher, who serves as legal counsel for the Center for Conscience Initiatives at ADF, say that the case is a clear example of the government committing viewpoint discrimination.

“[M]inors who are struggling with their identity can’t come to counselors and have the counselors help them regain comfort with their sex, but the ordinances allow counselors to aid in having kids identify as the opposite sex,” she pointed out during “Washington Watch” Monday. “… [T]he Chiles decision made clear that these types of ordinances discriminate against protected speech based on viewpoint, which is basically fatal under First Amendment scrutiny. So this is a serious restriction of the ability of counselors to provide help to kids in need.”

Beecher further emphasized that the talk therapy provided by counselors is client-directed, directly contradicting LGBT activist claims that it is somehow forced on children.

“[T]he ordinances say that counselors can’t help kids set goals that are essentially disfavored by the state, so this includes any efforts to change their gender identity,” she explained. “And what that means in practice is that if a kid comes in [and] is having feelings that they were born in the wrong body, a counselor can’t help them to regain comfort with their sex. … [T]he counselors who are bringing this case only help clients pursue goals that the clients set for themselves. … [T]hese ordinances prevent the clients from even coming in and set[ting] goals … that the client wants, even if that’s what is consistent with the client’s religious beliefs.”

Beecher went on to highlight how restrictions against talk therapy “impact counselors of faith and also counselors who don’t have a religious perspective.”

“The counseling relationship is personal,” she underscored. “These conversations are deep. They need to be genuine, authentic connections, understanding where a client is coming from. So if a counselor realizes that it’s not in the best interest of a client to push them down the path of identifying as the opposite sex — which often can set them up to be lifelong medical patients taking hormones, doing surgical interventions — even if you’re coming from a biblical perspective, certainly that would be out of step with the Bible’s teachings. But even if you’re not, just from a counseling perspective, you could want to help a client pursue their goals to regain comfort with their body.”

Beecher expressed hope that the therapists will ultimately prevail in their legal fight for free speech. “I think the trial court was clear that this is discrimination based on viewpoint, and it’s not justified to restrict the rights of counselors like this. So hopefully, this will be a smooth move through the court system to decide in favor of the counselors and to protect their rights to provide help to kids in need.”