Colorado Senate rejects constitutional amendment to let lawmakers expand civil claims for childhood sexual abuse

The Colorado Senate on third reading debated and then rejected SCR 25-002, the "childhood sexual abuse accountability" amendment, after extended floor remarks and testimony from supporting and opposing senators.

Senator Dylan Danielson, the prime sponsor, opened debate by urging passage and repeatedly framed the measure as a narrow question for voters. "I move SCR 25 dash 0 0 2, the child sexual abuse accountability amendment on third reading and final passage," Danielson said. He described the measure as asking voters whether the legislature should be able to enact laws to let survivors pursue civil claims when existing constitutional provisions currently limit retrospective legislation. Danielson told colleagues the change is "to give this body the chance to do the right thing" and said survivors had asked the chamber to "not silence the voters of Colorado."

Supporters emphasized the emotional and practical burden survivors face when civil statutes of limitation prevent civil accountability. Senator Martin Genet described the measure as "a simple request to please let us have the conversation," and explained from personal experience why survivors seek civil remedies in addition to criminal prosecutions. Senator Weisman placed the effort in legal context and said the resolution would return to Colorado the same authority many other states have: "We're not doing anything really novel here," he said, arguing the measure asks voters whether the General Assembly should be able to change the law in limited circumstances.

Opponents framed the resolution as a rule-of-law issue. The Senate Republican caucus echoed that point in floor remarks: "Senate Republicans unequivocally condemn anyone who commits crimes against children," the minority leader said, but argued SCR 25-002 "upends numerous constitutionally and legally settled rights, including principles of legal certainty, the principle of finality of litigation, and other elements of due process."

The resolution required 24 votes for passage but failed on a roll call. The clerk recorded 23 ayes and 12 noes; the presiding officer announced that SCR 25-002 "is lost."

Why it mattered: Supporters said the change would restore a pathway for civil accountability that the Colorado Supreme Court has restricted in prior cases and allow voters to decide whether to authorize the General Assembly to act. Opponents said the constitutional amendment would undermine settled constitutional protections and legal finality.

Votes at a glance: The motion to pass SCR 25-002 failed, 23–12.

What happens next: As a concurrent resolution proposing a constitutional amendment, SCR 25-002 would have required either a two-thirds vote in the General Assembly or a petition to place the question before voters. With the Senate vote now failed, proponents said they could pursue the alternate route (signature petitions) or continue outreach to secure additional legislative support.

Context and history: Sponsors repeatedly referenced prior legislation (a 2021 enactment described in floor remarks) that the Colorado Supreme Court later found constitutionally problematic. Danielson and others said the court's decision left survivors without the civil pathway they sought, which prompted the current ballot-amendment approach. The floor debate included multiple emotional survivor testimonies referenced by senators and a broader discussion about the intended narrow scope of the proposed change.

Ending note: The resolution drew sustained floor debate, with sponsors emphasizing survivor testimonies and opponents stressing constitutional and finality concerns. The Senate rejected sending the amendment to the ballot at this time.