A federal appeals court has breathed new life into a legal challenge against Kansas City and Jackson County ordinances that restrict certain types of counseling related to sexual orientation and gender identity. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal on Thursday, sending the case back for reconsideration.
The lawsuit was originally filed in February 2025 by two counselors, Wyatt Bury and Pamela Eisenreich, who argue that local ordinances passed by Kansas City and Jackson County violate their constitutional right to free speech. The therapists contend that the regulations prevent them from having certain conversations with clients who voluntarily seek counseling to address questions about their sexual orientation or gender identity.
The appeals court’s decision relied heavily on a recent Supreme Court ruling from March 31 in the case of Chiles v. Salazar. In that case, the nation’s highest court voted 8-1 that a similar Colorado law violated First Amendment protections. The Supreme Court determined that such regulations involve speech rather than professional conduct, and that they discriminate based on viewpoint.
In its five-page opinion, the three-judge panel noted that Kansas City and Jackson County had made the same arguments that the Supreme Court had already rejected in the Colorado case. The court specifically highlighted that local governments had attempted to characterize their ordinances as regulating professional conduct rather than speech, a distinction the Supreme Court found unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Roseann A. Ketchmark had initially dismissed the lawsuit before the Supreme Court issued its decision in the Colorado case. During a May hearing following that ruling, representatives from Kansas City and Jackson County indicated they would consider amending their ordinances to address the constitutional concerns raised by the Supreme Court. However, attorneys for the plaintiffs noted that neither jurisdiction had taken action for five weeks after the high court’s decision.
Bryan D. Neihart, representing the counselors through the Alliance Defending Freedom, argued that the ordinances create an uneven playing field by allowing certain types of counseling while prohibiting others. According to the plaintiffs, the regulations permit counselors to discuss some approaches to gender identity questions but forbid discussions that clients specifically request regarding alignment between their identity and biological sex.
The appeals court panel, consisting of Chief Judge Steven M. Colloton, Judge Bobby E. Shepherd, and Judge Jonathan A. Kobes, determined that the case should return to the district court for further proceedings. The judges instructed the lower court to reconsider the case in light of the Supreme Court’s recent guidance on similar regulations.
During oral arguments, Kansas City and Jackson County representatives acknowledged the Supreme Court’s decision but disputed how directly it applied to their specific ordinances. Despite this, they did not file a formal response to the plaintiffs’ notification about the relevance of the Supreme Court ruling to their case.
The reversal marks a significant development in ongoing legal debates about the regulation of counseling practices. The case now returns to the federal district court, where Judge Ketchmark will need to reconsider the constitutional questions raised by the plaintiffs in light of the Supreme Court’s recent First Amendment jurisprudence.
The Kansas City Attorney’s Office has not yet commented on the appeals court’s decision or indicated whether the city plans to modify its ordinance in response to the ruling.
Leave a Reply