By Jen Schumann | Rocky Mountain Voice
The Colorado Democratic Party’s central committee meets Wednesday to decide what to do about its own governor.
In front of it is a formal complaint, signed by hundreds of Democrats and growing by the hour, asking the party to censure Gov. Jared Polis for commuting Tina Peters’ sentence. The signers are not asking a court to undo the commutation. They are not asking the legislature to reverse it. They cannot.
Colorado’s constitution gives the governor sole clemency authority, and neither the courts nor the legislature nor the party can take back what Polis already signed. What the signers want is for the party to declare that one of its own governors acted against its interests, to bar him from its marquee events and to say publicly that his decision does not speak for the party.
The complaint is the sharpest sign yet of how far Polis’ clemency decision has split the party he has led for eight years. It arrives alongside an impeachment call from attorney general candidate David Seligman, and a sitting U.S. senator running to replace him who has called the decision disqualifying.
None of those efforts can change what Polis did. Why Democrats are pursuing them anyway is the actual story.
What the complaint is
Page one of the controversy complaint against Gov. Jared Polis, as circulated May 19. The document is hosted as an open, editable file that remains open for signatures. The signature count shown is supplied by the document’s organizers and was not independently verified by RMV.
The document is a “formal controversy complaint” submitted May 18 under Section 5 of the Colorado Democratic Party rules, which cover conduct alleged to be “detrimental to the interests of the Party.” It is addressed to party leadership, including chair Shad Murib and the Democratic county chairs. It is an internal party proceeding, not a government one.
It was submitted by Ian Coggins, a senior campaign manager at Siegel Long Public Affairs and a Denver Democratic Party official.
The complaint states twice that it does not challenge the governor’s authority to grant clemency. Under Article IV, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution, clemency is the governor’s alone. The complaint repeatedly acknowledges Polis had the legal power to act. The dispute is over whether Democrats believe he should have.
The complaint asks for a formal finding that Polis engaged in conduct detrimental to the party, a formal censure, suspension from party events as an honored guest or speaker, a public reaffirmation of the party’s election-integrity commitments and a statement clarifying that the clemency does not reflect the party’s positions.
It specifically names the Obama Gala and DemFest among those events.
Who signed
The signature list is what gives the complaint its political weight. By midday May 19 it carried roughly 450 publicly listed names. The Denver Gazette reported the total as nearing 500 the same day. The number has climbed steadily since the complaint went up, and any single figure is only a snapshot. The document remains open for signatures through May 22.
The signers include two sitting county election officials, Denver Clerk and Recorder Paul López and Adams County Clerk and Recorder Josh Zygielbaum, the kind of election administrators the complaint says it is written to defend. They are joined by Senate President Pro Tem Cathy Kipp of Fort Collins and assistant Senate majority leader Lisa Cutter of Littleton, the two highest-ranking legislators on the list, along with roughly a dozen other sitting legislators, four county commissioners, three Democratic National Committee members and attorney general candidate David Seligman.
The complaint also reports six members of the party’s own central committee among the signers, the same body scheduled to weigh it Wednesday.
Murib, the party chair, had already condemned the commutation before the complaint landed.
“Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers and sentenced by a judge who said she would do it all over again if she could,” Murib said in a May 15 statement. “The Republican district attorney who prosecuted her called any sentence reduction ‘a gross injustice.’ He’s right.”
No prominent Colorado Democrat in elected office has publicly rallied behind the commutation itself, even among those who have stopped short of backing censure.
The impeachment call
Seligman, who is running for attorney general, went further than censure. He called on the General Assembly to reconvene in a special session to impeach or censure Polis, arguing the governor commuted Peters’ sentence after the legislative session ended “likely in an effort to avoid accountability.”
Seligman’s argument rests on the calendar. The legislature adjourned May 13. Polis signed the commutation May 15. The General Assembly is not scheduled to return until January 2027, within hours of when Polis’ final term ends.
Lawmakers can call themselves into a special session if two-thirds of all members sign a written request and deliver it to the presiding officers of both chambers.
That power, as the Denver Gazette noted, has never been used in Colorado. By the Gazette’s account, every special session in state history has been convened by the governor. Reaching the two-thirds threshold would mean a Democrat supermajority voting to reconvene against its own departing governor over a clemency the constitution let him grant alone.
What the courts had not finished
Polis acted after Peters’ convictions were upheld but before the trial court completed resentencing ordered by the Colorado Court of Appeals.
A Mesa County jury convicted Peters in 2024 on seven counts stemming from a 2021 breach of the county’s election equipment. The Court of Appeals upheld all seven convictions April 2. It vacated her nine-year sentence after finding the trial court improperly weighed her protected speech about election fraud claims, then sent the case back to 21st Judicial District Judge Matthew Barrett for resentencing. That resentencing had not happened when Polis commuted the sentence to 4 years and 4.5 months and ordered Peters paroled June 1.
21st Judicial District Attorney Dan Rubinstein, who prosecuted Peters, said the governor’s First Amendment rationale overstated what the appeals court actually ruled.
The Court of Appeals “did not find the sentence overly harsh, but merely ordered Judge Barrett to resentence her with a cleaner record,” Rubinstein said in a written statement. “That process was still underway, yet the Governor chose to substitute his judgment for the courts, the sentencing judge and the Mesa County community that bore the consequences.”
What Democrats can actually accomplish
The demands are loud. The mechanisms behind them are not.
A censure is a statement. It can keep Polis off a stage at the Obama Gala. It cannot remove him, shorten his term or reverse the commutation. Impeachment needs a legislature that will not return until 2027. A recall is pointless against a governor who is term-limited and gone in January.
The one consequence anyone has publicly named that outlasts Polis’ term came from U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet. The night of May 18, Bennet posted that if he becomes Colorado’s next governor, “Jared Polis will not be considered in my place” for an appointment to Bennet’s open Senate seat. Asked about it by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Bennet did not soften the message.
“I viewed the decision that he made with respect to Tina Peters as disqualifying,” Bennet said. He also called Peters “a stone cold election denier” and said the commutation made no sense.
The Polis administration has not backed away. Spokesman Eric Maruyama said the governor made “the decision he felt was right, not popular,” agreeing with the appeals court that the state violated Peters’ First Amendment rights and wanting “an expeditious remedy” rather than years of further appeals.
“One of the great things about the Democratic Party is that we are a big tent, and there is space to debate and disagree,” Maruyama said.
That is the question the complaint cannot force Polis to answer before he leaves office, and it is the one the signers keep returning to anyway.
“A lot of people are tired of watching political parties demand accountability from everyone except their own powerful elected officials,” Coggins said in a Facebook post. “I think that frustration is real, and I think ignoring it further erodes trust in our institutions.”
That frustration has a second test the complaint does not mention. The same May 15 clemency batch included another commutation—one that has drawn no party complaint, no impeachment call and no signature drive, reported in a companion article.
![FD863768-0ACF-495E-9D21-2EF784DFFA6B[1]](https://rockymountainvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/FD863768-0ACF-495E-9D21-2EF784DFFA6B1-300x300.png)