Note: Five bills represent dangerous expansions of state power and erosions of constitutional rights. One additional bill raises concerns pending further review. Only SB26-027, the final bill analyzed, deserves support.
SB26-004: Red Flag Gun Confiscation Expansion
Senator Tom Sullivan and Representative Meg Froelich introduced legislation expanding who can petition courts for extreme risk protection orders to confiscate firearms. SB26-004 adds healthcare facilities employing co-responders, healthcare professionals, behavioral health treatment facilities, K-12 schools, and higher education institutions as petitioners authorized to seek gun seizures.
The bill passed Senate State, Veterans & Military Affairs 3-2 on party lines Tuesday after four hours of testimony. Rocky Mountain Gun Owners led opposition, citing Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment violations.
Colorado’s 2019 red flag law already allows family members, household members, and law enforcement to petition for orders removing firearms from individuals deemed dangerous. SB26-004 expands this to institutional petitioners—schools, universities, healthcare facilities—creating incentives for organizations to initiate confiscation proceedings based on subjective risk assessments rather than criminal charges or convictions.
The Second Amendment protects firearm ownership from infringement. The Fourth Amendment prohibits seizures without probable cause and due process. Red flag orders remove property based on civil proceedings with lower evidentiary standards than criminal prosecutions require.
Institutional petitioners lack the personal knowledge family members possess. A school administrator or healthcare facility employee can initiate confiscation based on secondhand reports, student behavior, or medical records without direct threat evidence. The bill expands who can trigger state seizure of constitutional rights, replacing due process with institutional authority.
Sullivan’s son died in the 2012 Aurora theater shooting. Personal tragedy doesn’t override constitutional protections. SB26-004 advances to Senate second reading.
SB26-005: State Lawsuit Against Federal Immigration Officers
Senators Mike Weissman and Julie Gonzales introduced legislation allowing lawsuits against federal immigration officers in state court for alleged constitutional violations during enforcement operations. Representatives Javier Mabrey and Yara Zokaie sponsor the House companion. SB26-005 strips sovereign immunity, qualified immunity, and supremacy clause protections from federal agents, mandating courts award plaintiff attorney fees even when suits merely act as “significant catalyst” for policy changes.
The bill violates the Supremacy Clause by subjecting federal officers enforcing federal immigration law to state court jurisdiction. Article I, Section 8 grants Congress exclusive authority over immigration, not Colorado courts. The mandatory attorney fee provision creates a litigation magnet designed to bankrupt enforcement operations through lawsuits regardless of merit.
Sponsors cite Minnesota ICE operations as justification, but the bill applies to any constitutional claim by anyone “injured” during enforcement—including illegal aliens resisting lawful detention. Federal officers already face federal accountability through Bivens actions and Department of Justice oversight.
Colorado seeks to obstruct Trump administration immigration enforcement through state court harassment. The legislation weaponizes state sovereignty against legitimate federal authority, inverting constitutional federalism to protect illegal immigration over public safety.
SB26-018: Custody Stripped from Parents Rejecting Gender Ideology
Senators Chris Kolker and Katie Wallace, with Representatives Meg Froelich and Lorena García, introduced legislation authorizing Colorado courts to strip custody from parents who refuse to affirm their child’s claimed gender identity. The “Legal Protections for Dignity of Minors” bill suppresses court records of minor name changes and requires judges to consider whether parents “recognize the child’s identity as it relates to a protected class” when allocating parenting time and decision-making authority.
The legislation violates fundamental parental rights protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Parents possess constitutional authority to direct their children’s upbringing, including medical and psychological care. SB26-018 empowers courts to override parental judgment based on gender ideology compliance.
The bill creates a custody weapon: file for name change, claim parent doesn’t “recognize” new identity, use that claim to reduce the parent’s custody. Courts must “consider” this factor—providing legal cover to punish parents who maintain biological reality and refuse dangerous medical interventions.
Colorado law already protects minors through abuse and neglect statutes. SB26-018 redefines disagreement with gender transition as grounds for custody loss, compelling parents to facilitate psychological and medical harm or lose their children. The state claims authority over children’s souls, not just their safety.
SB26-001: Property Tax Revenue for Workforce Housing
CONCERNING – PENDING FURTHER REVIEW
Senator Dylan Roberts with Representatives Andrew Boesenecker and Chris Richardson introduced legislation Thursday allowing counties to use property tax revenue for workforce housing programs. The bill passed Senate Local Government & Housing Committee 4-3 on party lines. All three Senate Republicans—Baisley, Liston, and Rich—voted no despite Republican House sponsorship.
SB26-001 authorizes counties to redirect property tax revenue to statutory housing authorities previously restricted to enterprise funding. Local governments gain authority to acquire, lease, or sell property for affordable housing developments. The bill exempts construction materials on workforce housing projects from sales tax and updates Colorado’s Middle-Income Housing Tax Credit to allow transfers to entities without project ownership interest.
Proponents call it “local control” removing state restrictions. The bill has no fiscal impact because it redirects existing revenue rather than raising taxes. Counties would choose whether to fund housing programs from property tax collections currently supporting roads, public safety, and infrastructure.
HB26-1001: State Override of Local Zoning Authority
Representatives Andrew Boesenecker and Javier Mabrey, with Senators Tony Exum and Julie Gonzales, introduced the HOME Act granting nonprofits, transit agencies, schools, and universities authority to bypass local zoning regulations and build housing up to three stories without local government objection. HB26-1001 strips communities of land-use control, mandating acceptance of developments regardless of infrastructure capacity, neighborhood character, or resident input.
Cory Gardner’s Colorado Accountability Project documented how the bill substitutes state judgment for local control and rewards the nonprofit/NGO complex over private market solutions.
The Tenth Amendment reserves police powers—including zoning authority—to states and localities. Colorado’s constitution grants home rule municipalities broad self-governance. HB26-1001 centralizes power in Denver, allowing state-favored entities to override voter-approved zoning codes protecting property values and community standards.
The bill exempts “mission-driven organizations” from restrictions other property owners face. A school district or transit authority can build high-density housing adjacent to single-family neighborhoods without permits, hearings, or local approval. Residents lose control over their communities’ future.
Governor Polis markets this as “affordable housing,” but nothing mandates affordability. The law enables any qualifying organization to develop any underutilized land—parking lots, athletic fields, surplus property—without local consent. Communities bear the costs of increased traffic, strained utilities, and changed character while losing the authority to say no.
HB26-1005: Forced Union Dues Without Worker Choice
Representatives Jennifer Bacon and Javier Mabrey, with Senators Jessie Danielson and Iman Jodeh, reintroduced legislation eliminating Colorado’s Labor Peace Act requirement for a second election before unions can force non-members to pay dues. The “Worker Protection Act” removes the 75% threshold for union security agreements, allowing bare-majority unions to impose fees on all workers after winning a single election.
The bill violates First Amendment freedom of association by compelling financial support for organizations workers oppose. Colorado’s two-election system—unique nationwide since 1943—protects worker choice. The first election determines union representation. The second requires 75% approval before forcing non-members to fund union activities.
HB26-1005 eliminates that protection. After a union wins 51% in one election, all workers must pay dues whether they support the union or not. The legislation forces workers to subsidize political advocacy, collective bargaining, and union operations they reject.
Governor Polis vetoed this bill in 2025, recognizing the Labor Peace Act has served Colorado for 80 years. Democrats reintroduced it unchanged. Union bosses want forced dues without supermajority consent. Workers lose the right to opt out. Colorado becomes a forced-unionization state, eliminating workplace freedom through legislative fiat.
SB26-027: THE GOOD BILL – Protecting Children Through Equal Parenting Time
Senator Lynda Zamora Wilson introduced legislation creating a rebuttable presumption that children benefit from equal time with both parents. The Parental Equality and Child Empowerment Act (PEACE Act) establishes that when parents live within 25 miles of their child’s school or reasonable location, equal parenting time—defined as at least 45% with each parent—serves the child’s best interest.
SB26-027 corrects Colorado’s current system where courts allocate custody without presuming children need both parents. Research consistently demonstrates children with involved fathers and mothers show better academic performance, emotional stability, and social development. Single-parent custody often results from court bias, not family circumstances.
The bill allows rebuttal through clear and convincing evidence of abuse, unfitness, substance abuse, or logistical barriers. Safety concerns override the presumption. Courts retain authority to adjust arrangements when equal time genuinely harms the child.
Colorado currently prioritizes “best interests” without defining them, giving judges unchecked discretion. The PEACE Act provides clear standards protecting children’s relationships with both parents. Mothers and fathers both matter. Children deserve both parents actively involved unless specific, proven circumstances justify otherwise.
This is pro-family legislation. SB26-027 recognizes that except in cases of genuine unfitness or danger, children thrive with meaningful time with both parents. Unlike the six concerning or dangerous bills above, Colorado should support this Republican-sponsored effort to protect children and parental rights.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 