Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the PEACE Act SB26027 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hours of testimony on 'PEACE Act' divide committee; amended bill is postponed indefinitely 3–2
Summary
Lawmakers heard extensive, often emotional testimony for and against the Parental Equality and Child Empowerment Act (SB 26‑027). Proponents argued a rebuttable presumption of equal parenting time would reduce false allegations and litigation; opponents — including domestic violence advocates and the Colorado Bar Association family law section — said the presumption and a higher evidentiary standard could endanger survivors. Two amendments were adopted; the committee later voted 3–2 to postpone the bill indefinitely.
Senator Zamora Wilson introduced Senate Bill 26‑027, the Parental Equality and Child Empowerment (PEACE) Act, asking the committee to start custody cases with a rebuttable presumption of equal parenting time when both parents are fit, safe and willing, and to require written findings if a court departs from that presumption.
"This bill establishes a presumption of equal shared parenting in custody cases," Senator Zamora Wilson said in closing remarks, arguing the measure would reduce litigation and protect parent‑child relationships while leaving judicial discretion intact.
Proponents — a mix of parents, family‑law reform groups and some therapists — recounted long, costly court fights and presented research and out‑of‑state examples where shared parenting presumptions reduced conflict and docket load. Judge Micah Pence, a family court judge in Kentucky who said the state adopted a similar law in 2018, told the committee she saw fewer false allegations and a calmer docket after Kentucky’s reform and said judges retain discretion but must explain their reasoning in writing: "I don't believe that my discretion has been diminished at all. I just have to give a reason."
Opponents included domestic violence organizations, survivor‑advocacy groups and the Colorado Bar Association family law section. David Karnes of Violence Free Colorado warned that survivors often lack documentary evidence and said a presumption that shifts the burden to victims "can discourage disclosure and press our survivors into unsafe arrangements." The family law section argued that raising the standard to "clear and convincing" in custody proceedings would unfairly disadvantage self‑represented litigants and could make it harder to protect children.
Witnesses offered starkly different personal narratives: several survivors described courts failing to recognize patterns of coercive control and months or years of additional trauma, while many fathers and other proponents recounted cases in which they said false allegations removed them from their children's lives with little evidence.
Committee action: The sponsor offered two textual amendments on scope and language; both were adopted without objection. After lengthy debate and closing remarks, a motion to postpone the amended bill indefinitely passed by reverse roll call, 3–2, ending further action in the committee at this hearing.
What happens next: With the committee vote to postpone indefinitely, SB 26‑027 will not advance from this committee unless a member brings it back or the sponsor reintroduces the policy in future legislation.
