U.S. Supreme Court: Is counselling "conduct" or "speech"?
This article discusses a pending Supreme Court case that raises the question of whether speech by counselors qualifies for full First Amendment protection, especially when states attempt to regulate therapeutic speech. It highlights tensions between state efforts to govern professional practices—particularly when they involve mental health or counseling—and the free-speech rights of those providing guidance or therapy. The piece notes that courts have sometimes treated professional speech differently from ordinary speech, applying intermediate or limited scrutiny, especially where states claim they are protecting clients from harm. It underscores that, because counseling often involves expressive, introspective communication, restricting it can implicate both regulatory concerns and constitutional freedoms. The article argues that resolving how much the state may limit what therapists say — without infringing on free thought and speech — will require courts to refine doctrine that distinguishes permissible regulation of health practices from impermissible censorship of ideas.