Michigan stopped enforcing its conversion therapy ban on July 30, 2026. A federal judge entered a stipulated order and final judgment in Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee and Hillsdale Counties v. Whitmer, declaring the state’s 2023 law unconstitutional as applied to licensed counselors whose therapy “consists exclusively of talking.”
The state didn’t fight it. Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office signed the stipulation.
That makes Michigan the first state to formally surrender a conversion therapy ban since the Supreme Court decided Chiles v. Salazar in March. It will not be the last. The attorney who won the case said so out loud.
Michigan Signed a Stipulated Order Rather Than Defend a Law It Had Already Lost
Michigan’s law took effect after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed Public Act 117 of 2023 on July 26, 2023. It barred state-licensed mental health professionals from trying to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Michigan was the 22nd state to pass one.
Catholic Charities and Emily McJones, a licensed therapist who runs a counseling practice in Jackson, sued to overturn it. U.S. District Judge Jane Beckering refused to block the law. On Dec. 17, 2025, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed her.
Judge Raymond Kethledge wrote for the majority. “We hold, therefore, that HB 4616 is subject to the strictest of scrutiny, under the First Amendment, as a content- and viewpoint-discriminatory restriction upon speech.” Judge Rachel Bloomekatz dissented.
After the Supreme Court ruled in March, the case went back to Beckering with the outcome effectively settled. The July 30 judgment closed it.
Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Nessel, told Michigan Public: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”
One clarification worth having, because a lot of coverage has blurred it. The Legislature didn’t repeal anything. Public Act 117 is still on the books. A court has declared it unenforceable against licensed clinicians doing talk-based conversion therapy, and the state has agreed to stand down. The parts of the law reaching aversive or physical practices were not at issue and were not struck.
What the Supreme Court Actually Held in Chiles v. Salazar, and What It Left Open
The Supreme Court decided Chiles v. Salazar on March 31, 2026, by a vote of 8-1. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority. Justice Elena Kagan concurred, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented alone.
Here is the part that keeps getting reported wrong. The Court didn’t rule that therapists have a constitutional right to practice conversion therapy on children. It ruled that Colorado’s law regulates speech based on viewpoint, that the 10th Circuit applied the wrong standard, and that the case had to be reconsidered under a far tougher one.
Gorsuch wrote that Colorado’s statute “does not just regulate the content of Ms. Chiles’s speech. It goes a step further, prescribing what views she may and may not express.”
The Court reversed and remanded. Colorado’s law is still on the books. It has not been struck down.
The ruling also stayed narrow on purpose. It addressed talk therapy by a licensed counselor. It didn’t touch bans on physical or aversive practices, malpractice liability, or professional licensing discipline. Legal analysts have flagged those as the routes that remain open.
Virginia Stopped Enforcing Its 2020 Law a Year Before Michigan Did
Michigan is the first state to give up a ban after Chiles. It is not the first state where one went dark.
On June 4, 2025, a Henrico County Circuit Court judge in Virginia entered a consent decree in a case brought by counselors John and Janet Raymond. The order, announced publicly on July 1, 2025, allows licensed counselors to conduct talk-based conversion therapy with minors. Attorney General Jason Miyares’ office signed it.
No merits ruling. No appeal. A settlement.
That matters for anyone tracking what happens next, because it shows the fastest way a ban dies is not a court striking it down. It is an attorney general deciding not to defend it.
Where the Other 22 States and Washington, D.C., Stand Right Now
Twenty-three states plus the District of Columbia prohibit licensed providers from subjecting minors to conversion therapy, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Michigan is counted in that number. Roughly 49% of LGBTQ+ youth ages 13 to 17 live in a state with a prohibition on the books.
Every one of those laws now sits under the same constitutional cloud. None has been repealed. None has been struck down nationwide. Each one is only as durable as its state’s willingness to defend it, and the pace of the next lawsuit.
The exposure is not evenly distributed. States inside the 6th Circuit, meaning Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee, are bound by binding circuit precedent. States elsewhere face Chiles as a Supreme Court holding on standard of review, not as an automatic loss. That difference will decide how long some of these laws survive.
Becket’s Lead Counsel Told Other States to “Take Note”
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty represented the plaintiffs. Senior counsel Luke Goodrich didn’t treat the outcome as the end of anything.
“Michigan is acknowledging that its law is unconstitutional,” Goodrich said. “It is illegal for Michigan to muzzle these counselors and deprive children of the help they need.”
He added that “states still trying to censor that care should take note.”
Goodrich has also described the bans as pushing young people toward medical intervention. That framing is contested. Every major U.S. medical and mental health association, including the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, has rejected conversion therapy as ineffective and harmful.
Jay Kaplan, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Michigan, put it plainly to Michigan Public: “We know that there are studies showing this is pretty much a fraudulent, discredited practice.”
The Trevor Project’s research found that LGBTQ+ young people who went through conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to attempt suicide.
Colorado’s HB26-1322 Shows States a Way to Regulate Without Banning Speech
Colorado lost at the Supreme Court and immediately started building something else.
State Reps. Alex Valdez and Karen McCormick introduced HB26-1322, which creates a civil cause of action for people harmed by conversion therapy. It reaches licensed professionals and the entities that hired or supervised them. It removes the statute of limitations. It lets a representative sue within five years of a survivor’s death.
The Colorado House passed it on April 3, 2026. It moved to the state Senate.
The design is the point. A ban tells a counselor what she may not say, which is exactly what the Supreme Court called viewpoint discrimination. A liability statute lets a survivor sue for the damage a practice caused. Those are different legal machines.
Rep. Matt Soper, a Republican, called the bill “a slap in the face” to the Supreme Court and “a de facto ban on conversion therapy moving forward.”
Whether it survives its own First Amendment challenge is untested. No court has ruled on this approach post-Chiles. Anyone telling you it is bulletproof is guessing.
More Than Half of Conversion Therapy Practitioners Were Never Covered by These Laws
The bans reached licensed clinicians. That was always a fraction of the problem.
The Trevor Project’s 2023 report “It’s Still Happening” identified more than 1,320 active conversion therapy practitioners across 48 states and Washington, D.C. Of those, 605 were licensed professionals. The other 716, about 54%, were ministerial or religious practitioners.
State licensing laws never touched that majority. Clergy, unlicensed life coaches and lay ministries operated outside them before Chiles and operate outside them now.
The researchers also called their own count a floor, not a ceiling, since much of this work happens quietly.
What Michigan Families and Survivors Can Still Use
The order removed one tool. It didn’t remove all of them.
Malpractice claims remain available. A licensed clinician in Michigan is still bound by the standard of care, and conversion therapy is rejected by the profession’s own bodies. Consumer protection law is another route Michigan officials have raised. Licensing boards still handle complaints about competence and harm.
Nessel’s office has not said whether it will appeal. Given that the state signed the stipulation and entered final judgment, an appeal looks unlikely, though her office has not closed the door publicly.
For a parent looking for care right now, the practical question is not what a statute says. It is whether a specific therapist will affirm your kid. Ask directly. Ask what their approach is to a young person questioning their identity. A clinician who deflects that question, unfortunately, answered it.
If this is the kind of story you want more of, stories that fact-check the headlines and add to the conversation, subscribe to The Queer Agenda.
If you or someone you love needs support, the Trevor Project runs a free 24/7 crisis line at 1-866-488-7386, and Trans Lifeline is at 1-877-565-8860.
Sources: Chiles v. Salazar, 6th Circuit opinion, Michigan Public, Virginia Mercury, Movement Advancement Project, The Trevor Project, Michigan AG
Love this background and research. Thank you! I think it's eugenics reborn. https://www.everythingatissue.com/p/buck-v-bell-reborn