After hours of debate that stretched into Tuesday evening, Colorado Democrats advanced a bill to extend protections for immigrants who may be subject to federal enforcement operations, while rejecting another measure that sought to regulate local law enforcement and federal agents. 

The two bills were introduced in the House last month as part of a legislative package in response to growing immigration crackdowns being carried out by the Trump administration. 

A third bill, introduced in the Senate on the first day of the legislative session, would allow federal immigration agents to be sued in state civil court. That bill passed the chamber in late February. 

The other measure lawmakers chose to advance on Tuesday, House Bill 1276, would expand existing limitations on how state and local officials interact with federal officers, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, as well as give more state oversight to detention centers. 

“We believe that, as we’re seeing attacks on our communities, that it’s important for Colorado to stand up and protect everyone that lives in our state,” lead bill sponsor Rep. Elizabeth Velasco, D-Glenwood Springs, said at Tuesday’s committee hearing. 

Both measures faced opposition from Republicans and law enforcement groups, who argued the bills would infringe on federal authority to carry out immigration enforcement and create public safety conflicts. 

“We recognize that these proposals come at a time of heightened public concern about federal immigration enforcement actions,” the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police wrote in a statement Tuesday. “However, the legislation could create new safety risks for our peace officers and place them in legally conflicting situations, while imposing significant unfunded administrative burdens on local agencies that do not control federal operations. The bills also could make it harder for agencies to work together.”

Lawmakers say ‘Yes’ to detention center oversight, more limits on data sharing 

HB 1276, also led by Rep. Lorena Garcia, D-Adams County, would give the state more authority to inspect food, water quality and other conditions at immigration detention centers. The centers would be required to pay for the inspections. Detention centers would also need to submit data annually to the state on the health outcomes of detainees and pass an environmental impact study.

The bill also bans local and state government transit services, such as buses, trains and state-regulated airports, from knowingly transporting immigrants for detention purposes. Violating any of those provisions would result in a civil penalty worth up to $50,000.

Additionally, the bill would hold local and state agencies, not just their employees, liable for breaching data-sharing protections with ICE or other federal immigration officials. It would also require state agencies to announce when they received a federal subpoena related to immigration enforcement, and require that if state agencies comply with a subpoena, they notify the individuals whose information has been shared. 

An amendment added to the bill Tuesday also stipulates that ICE is not allowed to enter secure areas of jails unless they have a judicial warrant. Proponents say those measures come in response to gaps in existing state law that were exposed last year. 

That includes an incident wherein Gov. Jared Polis tried to force the then-director of the state’s labor department, Scott Moss, to comply with a federal subpoena seeking the information of 35 adult sponsors who were housing unaccompanied immigrant children. 

While a judge ruled that Polis could not force Moss or the employees he directly supervised to comply, he did not outright prevent Polis from finding other ways to get the information from the agency, though the governor has since abandoned the effort. 

Immigrant advocates on the Western Slope have also raised concerns over what they say are instances of law enforcement complying with ICE to facilitate detainments, including by giving ICE access to secure facilities of jails and assisting federal agents in apprehending and transporting people for detainments, which allegedly occurred in Garfield County. 

Velasco, the first Mexican-born state legislator in Colorado, represents Western Slope communities with large immigrant populations, who she says are “living in fear right now.” 

“We’re seeing people hesitate to go to court or attend immigration appointments,” Velasco said. “Families worry that a loved one could be picked up at a work site or even the grocery store and not make it home, and communities are questioning whether public safety systems are there to protect them, or to harm them.” 

Rep. Matt Soper, R-Delta, said he understands that there are “many in our state who are fearful of federal immigration authorities knocking on their door and taking them in the middle of the night for deportation, heaven forbid, to a third-world country with absolutely no due process.” 

But Soper said he had concerns with the bill pitting Colorado against the federal government, which he said has “exclusive jurisdiction when it comes to immigration and immigration enforcement.” 

“I also want our law enforcement showing up to immigrant communities,” Soper added, “and I fear that if they were to show up and there happens to be ICE engagement going on at that particular time, that they would be chilled away from any sort of engagement to keep our friends and our neighbors safe.”

The House Judiciary Committee ultimately voted 6-5, mostly along party lines, to advance the bill to the House Finance Committee. 

Bill to regulate police interactions with ICE is rejected 

Lawmakers voted to kill a second measure, House Bill 1275, which would have required state and local law enforcement to arrest federal immigration officers who violate state law. 

Other provisions of the bill would have prohibited state and local law enforcement from concealing their identity in most circumstances and required that they receive training on state immigration law. 

Democrats who championed the bill said it was meant to hold federal agents accountable for unlawful and excessive conduct. They pointed to recent immigration operations in Minnesota in January, during which two U.S. citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, were shot and killed by federal agents. 

“It’s not lost on me that it was the death of two U.S. citizens in the suburbs that was the catapult to our constituents begging us — crying out — for help and for justice,” said Rep. Meg Froelich, D-Englewood, who was a lead sponsor of the bill alongside Rep. Yara Zokaie, D-Fort Collins and Sens. Iman Jodeh, D-Aurora, and Mike Weissman, D-Aurora. 

The bill faced pushback from law enforcement groups, who argued it would put them in the crossfire of federal immigration actions. The Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police said the measure would put law enforcement in an “impossible constitutional conflict,” since federal officers operate under different legal authorities. 

One of the bill’s most controversial measures, which would have blocked current and former ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents from working as law enforcement officers in Colorado, was heavily amended in response to law enforcement concerns. 

Rather than including a blanket ban, the bill was changed to require current and former agents to submit records related to any internal investigations or use-of-force incidents, which may disqualify them from being hired under Colorado law. 

Republicans were uniformly opposed to the bill, and some Democrats also expressed concern that the requirements for local police to potentially intervene in federal enforcement could escalate, rather than reduce, conflicts. 

“I do not want armed confrontation between peace officers and federal agents in our streets,” said Rep. Chad Clifford, D-Centennial. 

Clifford and another Democrat, Rep. Cecelia Espenoza of Denver, joined all Republicans on the committee to reject the bill in a 6-5 vote. 

A proposal to ban gender-affirming surgery for minors in Colorado will head to the November ballot, the Secretary of State’s Office announced Tuesday.

Protect Kids Colorado, the advocacy group backing the initiative, submitted nearly 165,000 signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot. The measure needed about 125,000 to qualify. It is the third of three measures backed by the advocacy group and the second specifically concerning transgender people.

The measure would ban health care professionals from knowingly performing, prescribing or providing surgery to minors “for the purpose of altering biological sex characteristics.” Those types of surgeries have been extremely low, despite the attention they receive.

In 2019, there were 2.1 reported gender-affirming surgeries per 100,000 children aged 15-17 across the country, according to a 2024 study published by the American Medical Association. There were nearly zero such surgeries performed on children aged 13 and 14, and zero performed on children 12 and younger.

Chanting “Tax the rich!” on the steps of the Colorado Capitol Tuesday, a coalition of advocacy groups kicked off their signature gathering effort to place a measure on the 2026 ballot that would raise taxes on higher earners. 

In what supporters are calling a graduated income tax, the measure would eliminate Colorado’s flat income tax rate in favor of a tiered system that would reduce taxes for some of the state’s lowest earners, while ratcheting up taxes on those making $500,000 or more annually. 

“We are giving voters a chance to say ‘Yes’ to cutting taxes for the 97% of Coloradans making less than $500,000 a year, to increasing taxes on only the wealthiest Coloradans and largest corporations and raising $2 billion a year for education, health care and child care,” said Chris deGruy Kennedy, a former state representative and president and CEO of the liberal-leaning think tank Bell Policy Center, who is helping spearhead the policy. 

Conservative groups have already mounted opposition to the proposal, which they attempted but failed to keep from clearing the state’s title board earlier this year. The title board decides whether citizen proposals meet the requirements to be considered on the ballot. 

Colorado is currently one of roughly a dozen states with a flat income tax, and has one of the lowest rates in the country at 4.4%, according to the Tax Foundation. 

Under the graduated tax proposal, the tax rate would be cut to as little as 3.7% for someone’s first $25,000 of annual income, with income between $25,001 and $100,000 being taxed at 4.2%. Income between $100,001 and $500,000 would still be taxed at 4.4% 

The rate would increase for higher earnings, with income between $500,001 and $750,000 taxed at 7.4%, while an income range of $750,001 to $1 million would be taxed at 7.9%. Income above $1 million would be taxed at the highest rate, 8.4%. 

Supporters say they are preparing for pushback on the proposal. 

The libertarian-leaning Independence Institute pushed against a graduated income tax when it was initially proposed last fall, arguing that the state’s low flat tax rate has made it attractive for businesses, entrepreneurs and skilled workers from across the country. 

The graduate income tax is supported by a consortium of 19 groups, including child and immigrant advocacy organizations, health and anti-hunger groups and local government leaders. Supporters say the measure is needed for Colorado to keep up with demands for social programs at a time when ongoing budget crises are forcing the state to pull back spending, which is being compounded by cuts to government services at the federal level. 

Colorado lawmakers, who are in the midst of their legislative session, which began in January, are currently debating how to close a roughly $850 million budget gap in the upcoming fiscal year’s spending plan. They’re weighing cuts to Medicaid and other state programs after already having to close billion-dollar deficits last summer and spring. 
DeGruy Kennedy blamed the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR, as the reason for the state’s grim budget environment, saying it has artificially limited Colorado’s ability to invest tax dollars into critical services. TABOR is an amendment to the state constitution approved by voters in 1992 that, among other things, limits state government revenue growth to the rate of population growth plus inflation.

“And to make matters worse, Donald Trump’s Congress passed a budget bill last year that gave massive tax cuts to the wealthy and the biggest corporations, all paid for by slashing funding for health care and food assistance programs,” deGruy Kennedy said, referring to Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which is slated to cut Medicaid funding by about $1 trillion over the next decade. 

Jennifer Remington, a Jefferson County resident whose spinal cord injury 16 years ago left her body paralyzed, spoke during Tuesday’s rally about her reliance on Medicaid, which pays for her at-home care. 

“These services provide the personal care assistance I need for the parts of my daily life that my body can no longer do on its own,” Remington said, adding that it allows her to live at home with her children rather than a nursing home or institutional care. 

“Programs like Medicaid are not an abstract line item in the budget; they are lifelines,” she said. “… By supporting this graduated income tax initiative, we can make sure that the next person whose life changes overnight still has the support they need to rebuild it.” 

Under the graduated tax proposal, the state would be able to keep the revenue it collects from the new tax rates, even if it is above the TABOR limit. That revenue would serve as a dedicated funding stream for public schools, health care and child care. 

Colorado would still be required to refund revenue it would otherwise collect under the existing income tax rate if it exceeds TABOR. Supporters of the graduated tax measure say doing so will preserve TABOR refunds. 

Tamara Pogue, a Summit County commissioner who serves as chair of the nonprofit group Counties and Commissioners Acting Together, said the additional funding will give the state the support it needs to reduce strains on local governments, which are currently being asked to do more with less. 

Pogue said the challenges may look different depending on the community. She gave the examples of rural areas where fragile health care systems and a lack of public funding can have a ripple effect throughout the entire local economy, and rural resort areas, like hers, where the tourism economy — while vital for the state — puts pressure on housing, infrastructure and the workforce. 

“I’m one of many commissioners in this state who wake up to phone calls and emails about what people in our communities lack, and then go to bed without the resources to solve those very same problems,” Pogue said. 

The measure still has a long way to go before it can be placed in front of voters. Supporters must gather upwards of 125,000 signatures to get the measure on the ballot this November, a process that can cost millions. 

Colorado Democrats are also pushing forward a separate measure to refer a ballot question to voters that would raise the TABOR cap by potentially $2 billion annually for the next decade, with the additional money being channeled into K-12 schools. 

That proposal, which must first clear both chambers of the legislature for it to be placed on the ballot, is led by the Colorado Education Association. Republicans have vowed to oppose it, seeing it as an attack on TABOR, which they say keeps government spending in check and returns more money to taxpayers. 

Colorado is among a growing list of states considering ideas to tax wealthier earners. 

Lawmakers in Washington this month passed what’s been referred to as a “millionaires tax” that imposes a 9.9% tax on annual income over $1 million. In California, supporters of a wealth tax are seeking to place a measure on the November ballot that would impose a one-time 5% tax on residents with net worths over $1 billion.