Colorado’s state slogan, “It’s Our Nature,” now carries a chilling undertone for those who value free expression. What was once a welcoming phrase now feels like a veiled threat, as Colorado rapidly ascends as arguably the most restrictive state for free speech in the nation. A relentless wave of measures targeting dissenting voices is reshaping the legal landscape.
Ironically, Colorado has repeatedly stumbled in its attempts to curtail First Amendment rights, achieving spectacular legal defeats that have, time and again, *reinforced* the very freedoms it seeks to limit. Despite these setbacks, the state’s Democratic legislature and governor are pressing forward with a new series of questionable laws, pushing the boundaries of constitutional limits.
One particularly alarming measure demands that lawyers, as a condition of filing cases in state courts, annually certify under penalty of perjury that they will not share client information with federal immigration officials. The provision is intentionally vague, creating a chilling effect on legal representation and raising serious concerns about due process.
This isn’t an isolated incident. For years, Colorado lawmakers and judges have systematically attacked core free speech and associational rights. The state even attempted to disqualify a former president from the ballot, a move swiftly and unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court – a rebuke so complete that not even the court’s liberal justices could support it.
The state’s pursuit of limiting free expression extends to the realm of commerce. Colorado aggressively sought to compel business owners to create products celebrating same-sex marriages, leading to landmark cases like *Masterpiece Cake Shop* and *303 Creative*. Even after initial losses, the targeting continued, ultimately resulting in significant victories for free speech advocates.
The fight over “conversion therapy” has also become a battleground. Colorado’s efforts to restrict speech and association related to this practice were overwhelmingly rejected by the Supreme Court in *Chiles v. Salazar*, an 8-1 decision that underscored the limits of state power. Undeterred, Colorado responded by doubling down, enacting legislation to expose counselors to heightened legal liability.
Currently, the state is defending a new public accommodation law that broadly defines “gender expression,” including “chosen name” and preferred pronouns. Initial rulings have favored Colorado, but appeals are already underway, promising further legal clashes.
The implications are far-reaching. Lawyers are objecting to being forced to endorse the state’s policies as a condition of practicing law, and the federal government is likely to challenge the immigration-related provision. Colorado’s Judicial Branch briefly posted a notice of the new certification requirement, then quietly removed it for “further discussion,” only to announce implementation months later.
Colorado’s pattern mirrors that of other jurisdictions – New York, Illinois, and Washington D.C. – that have inadvertently strengthened opposing rights through overreaching legislation. Just as these states triggered a series of Second Amendment victories with unconstitutional gun control laws, Colorado appears poised to become a proving ground for First Amendment rights.
The state’s motto, “Nil Sine Numine” – “Nothing without Providence” – takes on a peculiar resonance. For those dedicated to protecting free speech, Colorado’s consistent legal defeats are proving to be a surprising, and perhaps providential, boon. Despite the cost to taxpayers, the state seems determined to continue its pursuit of restricting expression, solidifying its position as a focal point in the ongoing battle for First Amendment freedoms.
