By Jimmy Smrz | Guest Commentary
DENVER, COLORADO—On May 1, 2024, The state House Education Committee hearing for Colorado Senate Bill 24-158 proceeded without calling for testimony from any of the 37 opponents who had registered to speak against the bill. Insiders were struck by the one-sided monopolization of the hearing, where only testimony in support of the proposed legislation was heard. This raises concerns about legislative protocols and stakeholder engagement.
Following its introduction in February, “Social Media Protect Juveniles Disclosures Reports” garnered significant legislative support. The bill passed out of the state Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee hearing on March 28 unanimously, and encountered only one dissenting vote in the full state Senate on April 18. With Republican Representative Lisa Frizell signing on as a primary sponsor, SB 24-158 gained support for being bipartisan and was expected to move quickly through the state House.
SB 24-158 proposed stringent age verification requirements on social media platforms. Despite its noble intent to protect underage users from online risks, the bill was criticized for potentially infringing on First and Fourth Amendment rights, and raised privacy concerns by requiring users of social media to provide government-issued identification to confirm their age.
Dozens of SB 24-158 opponents started the day of the state House hearing early, meeting at Plant Magic Cafe in uptown Denver to march downtown on Colfax Avenue to testify. Many of the advocates had attended a workshop at the local coffee shop the night before to prepare to testify against the legislation.
The golden dome of the Colorado State Capitol gleamed in the background as the group marched down Colfax, carrying banners and waving American flags. Many of the windows throughout the Capitol were open when the advocates arrived. The group let their presence be known to legislators by chanting “Freedom of Speech is under attack” and “Vote no on 158.”
In an interview for 9News, Kevin Matthews, who participated in the march commented, “As a father, I feel like the intentions of this bill are noble and honorable. However, I don’t think at this time it is the state’s responsibility to dictate what we can and can’t share online.”
The hearing began at 5:10 p.m. with one of the primary Sponsors of SB 24-158, Representative Megan Lukens, requesting the bill be Laid Over. Representative Lukens continued her opening statement to the committee, “There are some families that are here that have been waiting all day to testify. They have incredibly powerful and terrifying stories and these stories deserve to be shared as to the reasons as to why I am invested in this bill.”
Over the next 90 minutes, witnesses in favor of the bill, including families, lobbyists, lawyers, and Denver District Attorney Beth McCann, presented their support for SB 24-158. Supporters, including Blue Rising PAC co-founder Dawn Reinfeld, highlighted the county’s growing problem with fatal opioid overdose deaths among youth. However, during the hearing, those who opposed the bill, and waited all day to voice their concerns were not allowed to speak. Opponents waiting on Zoom to testify against the bill were disconnected from the state House hearing.
After hearing all the testimony in support of the bill, the state House Education Committee voted unanimously to lay over SB 24-158 until May 10th. With the legislative session ending May 8, 2024, this essentially ‘killed the bill’ at Representative Lukens’s request.
One advocate who signed up to testify against the bill, Mike Brancatelli, had never been inside the Colorado State Capitol before arriving that day to testify that the bill’s broad language could stifle free speech. After the hearing he shared, “There were a lot of us in the room that wanted to speak. It’s not fair. All voices should be heard, especially those of people in the room, who signed up, waited all day and made it a point to exercise their rights as citizens. It was a one-sided show and unfair treatment to all of us there who had intelligent and thoughtful things to say.”
Like many others who spent the day at the state Capitol, he went to great personal expense to have his voice go unheard, commenting that “because the times and days got moved around a bunch it was inconvenient but I still made it work. I cleared my day. I rescheduled my coaching and therapy clients at the last minute and offered them each a free session due to my changes within a shorter notice period.”
CBS National News reported on the “extreme effort” that led to the defeat of SB 24-158, detailing the significant efforts by various stakeholders to stop the bill. The report included a statement from a spokesperson for Colorado Governor Jared Polis, that included in part: “The Governor’s serious concerns about the impact of this bill on freedom, innovation, privacy, and Coloradans’ constitutional rights are shared by many Coloradans who have had their voices heard.”
Contrary to the Governor’s statement, many voices opposing the bill went unheard.
Representative Lukens told the committee, “I am optimistic, after work during the interim, that I can come back with a strong, effective version of this bill.”
While SB 24-158 suffered a loss in the Colorado Legislature, another loss was the citizens’ ability to be part of the legislative process. In the wake of the hearing’s unbalanced testimony, Ashley Troxell emailed Colorado House Speaker McCluskie to express her concerns. Troxell, who testified in March at the state Senate hearing against SB 24-158, illustrated numerous issues including the omission by a Colorado Women’s Bar Association representative in regards to ongoing lawsuits against similar legislation in other states. Below is the full text of Troxell’s email to Colorado House Speaker McCluskie, highlighting concerns regarding the House Education hearing on Senate Bill 24-158:
————————-
Troxell’s Email to Colorado House Speaker McCluskie
Dear House Speaker McCluskie,
I am writing to bring to your attention a concerning incident during the House Education hearing on May 1st for Senate Bill 24-158. As one of the 37 opponents who signed up to testify against the bill, I feel compelled to address the manner in which dissenting voices were silenced and disregarded during the proceedings.
Despite our efforts to participate in the democratic process by signing up to speak against Senate Bill 24-158, we were denied the opportunity to voice our concerns. At the same time, supporters of the bill were allowed to speak freely, often exceeding their allotted time. This unequal treatment silenced opposition, leaving us unable to express our perspectives.
Furthermore, it is troubling that there is no record of our opposition testimony moving forward. The Education Committee’s failure to acknowledge our voices undermines the integrity of the legislative process and raises serious questions about transparency and accountability within our government.
The lack of opportunity to counter misleading information presented during the hearing is of particular concern. For instance, when asked about similar laws in other states, the Colorado Women’s Bar Association representative failed to mention lawsuits in Utah, Ohio, and Arkansas. This omission deprives lawmakers of crucial information necessary for making informed decisions.
The suppression of dissenting voices undermines the fundamental principles of democracy and diminishes the public’s trust in our government institutions. I urge you to take action to ensure that all voices are heard and respected during legislative hearings, and that the democratic process is upheld with integrity and fairness.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and measures to be taken to prevent such incidents from occurring in the future.
Sincerely,
Ashley Troxell
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.