Law360 quoted McGuireWoods Chicago partner Gregory Fosheim in an April 7, 2026, story on the ripple effects of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy.”
Fosheim, who advises clients across healthcare and life sciences sectors, said the high court’s majority opinion in Chiles v. Salazar “preserves several viable ways” for states to pass legislation or regulation so that patients can sue over therapies aimed at changing a person’s sexuality or gender identity.
“States may require factual, noncontroversial disclosure as part of informed consent; specify grounds for malpractice liability; impose licensing discipline for actual harm; and promulgate rules addressing speech bound up with criminal conduct,” Fosheim said in the article.
“Similarly, laws that define and prohibit the administration of discredited practices while leaving room for clinicians to discuss risks, alternatives, and patient values stand on firmer constitutional ground than laws that police what words may be spoken,” he said.
Fosheim told Law360 that he “absolutely” expected more legal challenges ahead, even if states now face heightened scrutiny on rules over what clinicians can and cannot say.