The Supreme Court’s 8-1 ruling this week in Chiles v. Salazar is about more than one Christian counselor in Colorado and the state’s ham-fisted attempt to silence her. It is a window into one of the defining tensions of our political moment: the collision between the intolerance of modern progressivism and the enduring discipline of those — whether originalist conservatives or old-school liberals — who still believe the Constitution means what it says. 

Kaley Chiles is a licensed mental-health counselor who sits with clients, learns their goals, and tailors her methods to serve their self-determination. Some of her young clients, often from faith-filled families, hope to grow more comfortable with their biological sex and explore their identity through the lens of their religious beliefs. Colorado sought to make that conversation a punishable offense, potentially costing Chiles a $5,000 fine and her license. As she put it: “The law basically restricts the speech between me and my client. If your daughter were to say, ‘I think I am a boy,’ we can only affirm and validate that and assist with gender transition.”