Colorado bill adding protections for transgender people -- including against 'deadnaming' -- passes first hurdle

Seth Klamann, The Denver Post on Apr 2, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

DENVER — Transgender Coloradans — particularly children and supportive parents — would gain increased legal protections against discrimination under new legislation that cleared its first hurdle in the state House early Wednesday morning.

The party-line vote to advance House Bill 1312 came after 10 hours of dueling testimony from backers who decried anti-transgender discrimination and opponents who invoked parents’ rights and other objections.

The bill is formally named the Kelly Loving Act for a transgender woman killed in the 2022 Club Q nightclub shooting in Colorado Springs. Under the proposal, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which includes gender identity as a protected class, would add intentionally misgendering transgender people or referring to them by their “deadname” — meaning the name they used before they transitioned — to the discriminatory acts covered by the law in public accommodations.

The measure would also require family courts to consider a parent’s intentional deadnaming or misgendering of their transgender child during custody proceedings. It would prohibit courts from using other states’ anti-transgender laws to facilitate transferring custody of a child from one parent to another because the child received gender-affirming care.

“This bill is about ensuring that what we say exists with anti-discrimination is a reality for those who truly live life every day in fear of being discriminating against, retaliated against, harmed, harassed,” said Rep. Lorena Garcia, an Adams County Democrat sponsoring the bill with fellow Democratic Rep. Rebekah Stewart. “This bill is about making sure that what is assumed, whether it’s in rule or because we hear the word ‘anti-discrimination’ … is protected.”

The measure passed the House’s Judiciary Committee 7-4 shortly after midnight Wednesday. It now moves to the full House for the first of two floor votes. Should it clear those, it will go to the Senate to restart the process.

Testimony and debate on the bill began Tuesday afternoon. Supporters — including transgender Coloradans and their advocates — recounted their struggles with discrimination and in accessing gender-affirming care. They pointed to the high suicide rates among transgender people, particularly teens.

“I’m alive today because I had access to gender-affirming care,” Sky Childress said.

Opponents included anti-transgender activists, parents and people who described themselves as “detransitioners” — meaning they’d previously taken social or medical steps to change their gender identity but have since stopped.

They accused the bill sponsors of seeking to infringe on parents’ rights and of being part of a broader effort to “coerce” children.

“I know you want what’s best for these kids and we share in that mutual interest,” said Evan de la Cruz, who testified that they regretted undergoing gender-affirming care. “But please think of who these kids will be in the next 10 to 15 years.”

If it passes into law, HB-1312 would also prohibit schools from having gender-specific dress codes, and it would require a school with a chosen-name policy — used for students who prefer to go by nicknames, for instance — to also be inclusive of transgender students’ preferred names.

Initially, the bill would’ve required all official state forms to give people an option to use their chosen names, as opposed to their legal names. But state officials tacked an eye-watering $14 million price tag for implementation on that provision, presenting a significant financial obstacle in a tight budget year.

The cost estimate prompted Garcia to quip Wednesday that the state “considers upholding someone’s dignity worth $14 million.” She and Stewart struck the chosen-name provision from the bill to ease its passage.

The measure is the latest in a series of transgender-related bills proposed by lawmakers from both parties.

Democrats have broadly sought additional protections and accommodations for transgender people. A 2023 law requires new state buildings to have gender-neutral bathrooms, and a bill passed last year amended the state’s bias-motivated crime laws to cover the targeting of transgender people.

Already this year, lawmakers have passed a bill requiring that death certificates reflect a deceased person’s gender identity. Another bill set to be debated Wednesday — House Bill 1309 — would require health insurance plans to cover gender-affirming care.

Republicans, meanwhile, have broadly opposed the legislation. All four of the House Judiciary Committee’s Republican members voted against HB-1312 on Wednesday.

“We are doing more to take away parental rights — we are doing more to essentially cause the families to not be together, (for) children to be pulled from one parent to the other — based on what this bill will say is coercion,” said Rep. Ryan Armagost, a Berthoud Republican.

_____