Chiles v. Salazar · ¶53

Colorado's law does not regulate speech incident to conduct under either test. The State does not dictate what Ms. Chiles may say because her speech bears a close causal connection to some separately unlawful conduct like a traditional crime. Rather, Ms. Chiles seeks to speak with interested clients about steps they might take to change unwanted behaviors, expressions, or attractions related to sexual orientation or gender identity—conduct Colorado itself does not dispute those clients (or anyone else) may lawfully undertake. Cf. Tr. of Oral Arg. 58 (conceding that “life coaches” and other non-licensees can lawfully convey the advice Ms. Chiles seeks to offer). Nor does Colorado seek to regulate Ms. Chiles's speech for reasons unrelated to its content, like a ban on outdoor fres that happens to sweep in fag burning. Instead, the State's law trains directly on the content of her speech…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.