After two days of intense debate, the Colorado House of Representatives on Saturday passed Senate Bill 276, a measure that restricts federal immigration agents’ access to certain public spaces and imposes penalties for sharing personal information about immigrants under specific circumstances. The legislation is part of a broader effort to safeguard the civil rights of all Colorado residents, regardless of their immigration status.
Related Article: California Lawmakers Demand Answers for Homeland Security’s Elementary School ‘Welfare Checks’
The bill, which had already been approved by the state Senate in April, now awaits final approval as amended in the House before heading to Governor Jared Polis’ desk for a signature or veto, reports Denver7. Polis has 30 days to make a decision, and his stance on the legislation remains unclear.
If enacted, the bill would:
- Prevent federal immigration agents from entering schools, healthcare and childcare facilities, libraries, churches, and jails without a warrant.
- Prohibit public entities — including schools and judicial bodies — from sharing personally identifying information about individuals’ immigration status.
- Broaden current restrictions on state law enforcement from cooperating or sharing data with federal immigration authorities.
- Expand access to public facilities and in-state college tuition for undocumented immigrants.
Most Americans Oppose ICE Raids in Schools, Hospitals
In January, the Trump administration revoked a long-standing federal policy barring Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol officers from making arrests in “sensitive” areas, such as schools and healthcare facilities.
The change in policy is extremely unpopular, with 64% of Americans strongly opposed to ICE raids in schools and only 18% strongly in favor. More than half of Americans strongly oppose ICE raids in hospitals with only 27% strongly in favor.
Supporters of Colorado’s SB 276, including its sponsors, argue it is a vital step toward ensuring the protection of civil rights for all residents in the state, reports Colorado Politics. Speaking during the debate, lawmakers claimed the measure would foster trust between immigrant communities and public institutions, particularly schools and healthcare providers, by reducing fear of federal immigration enforcement.
Related Article: ICE in Schools: Districts, State Leaders Issue Guidelines for Dealing with ICE Agents
The House debate began on Friday, hours after the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the state of Colorado and local leaders, including the City and County of Denver, challenging what it calls “sanctuary policies.” These policies discourage local law enforcement from reporting immigration statuses to federal authorities. The lawsuit escalates tensions between the state and federal government over immigration enforcement.
Opponents criticized the bill as an extension of Colorado’s “sanctuary” policies, which they claim have contributed to an influx of immigrants into metro Denver after crossing the U.S. border illegally.
Republican Representative Jarvis Caldwell of Colorado Springs introduced an amendment during Friday’s debate that would have repealed the bill if the federal government retaliated by cutting funding to the state. The amendment, however, failed to pass.
Critics also expressed concern over potential economic repercussions if President Donald Trump’s previous administration policy of withholding funds from sanctuary cities were revived.
The legislation’s passage in the House highlights the ongoing conflict between state and federal priorities regarding immigration. The term “sanctuary jurisdiction” broadly refers to cities or states that limit collaboration with federal immigration enforcement. Denver’s policies have served as a flashpoint in these debates, most recently when Denver Mayor Mike Johnston testified before Congress in March on the city’s response to an immigrant influx.
If signed into law, SB 276 would mark a significant expansion of protections for individuals without legal immigration status. Proponents believe this move reflects Colorado’s leadership in prioritizing resident safety and inclusivity. However, critics worry about the practical and financial ramifications of the law amidst growing federal scrutiny.
