By Shaina Cole | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice
Colorado House Democrats recently leveraged their legislative authority with a calculated one-two punch, invoking Rule 14 on April 4, 2025, to cap debate on House Bill 1312 (HB-1312), the “Kelly Loving Act,” at a scant two hours, then deploying Rule 16 over the weekend to stifle discussion entirely and push the bill to an immediate vote.
These tools, seldom used outside of breaking filibuster gridlock, were not wielded here to clear a clogged calendar but to mute opposition to a measure poised to reshape parental rights, free speech, and family dynamics. This heavy-handed approach stripped away democratic deliberation, a move that should unsettle every Coloradan.
This isn’t about streamlining; it’s about dominance.
By slashing debate time and then axing it completely, the majority evaded meaningful scrutiny of HB-1312’s far-reaching provisions, signaling that their priorities override public input.
If Gov. Jared Polis signs it into law, the bill could transform Colorado’s social and legal landscape.
HB-1312 hinges on self-identification. It defines discrimination based on “gender identity” and “gender expression,” terms already in Colorado law (C.R.S. 24-34-301), which courts have interpreted as self-determined rather than tied to legal markers.
Anyone can wake up, declare a new identity—say, “John” to “Jane” or “he” to “she”—and demand compliance, no paperwork required.
HB-1312 designates “deadnaming” and “misgendering” as discriminatory acts in public accommodations—such as businesses and schools—carrying fines up to $500 per violation or exposure to civil lawsuits.
In homes, it flags a parent’s intentional deadnaming or misgendering as “coercive control” in custody battles, potentially tipping the scales against them.
Parents who reject gender ideology and opt for psychological support over affirmation could face fines or custody loss, undermining their rights at home.
Businesses and schools, too, risk penalties for missteps, amplified by the bill’s lack of clear legal benchmarks. A clerk might face a fine for saying “sir” to someone presenting ambiguously, a teacher could be penalized for sticking to a roster name, or a parent could lose custody for not adapting to a child’s sudden shift—all hinging on subjective self-identification.
Advocates argue this safeguards transgender individuals in a hostile climate, but its scope threatens free speech.
In Colorado, you can hurl insults without legal blowback unless they incite violence (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969). Yet, HB-1312 singles out gender-related speech for punishment, a distinction ripe for First Amendment challenges (Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 2015).
The deeper wound is the process itself.
Democracy hinges on open debate, not procedural chokeholds. Gov. Polis must weigh the bill’s intent against its flaws—and the precedent of its passage.
Vetoing it would not only halt a shaky law – but reaffirm that deliberation matters.
Without that, our statehouse risks turning into a mere echo chamber for the majority’s will.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.