Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Law Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee moves bigamy cleanup bill after lengthy debate over cohabitation and common‑law marriage
Summary
Senate Bill 13, which removes 'cohabitation' from Colorado's bigamy statute to focus criminal liability on multiple legal marriages, advanced to the committee of the whole after testimony and debate. Supporters said the change protects survivors and people in consensual relationships; some members raised concerns about preserving protections for prior spouses and common‑law marriage.
Representative Zocai presented Senate Bill 13 as a statutory cleanup to remove the ambiguous cohabitation language from the bigamy statute and align criminal exposure with the traditional concept of bigamy (two legal marriages). "We are removing cohabitation as one of the elements that meets the threshold for bigamy," the sponsor said.
Advocates from Bread and Roses Legal Center and survivor‑advocates testified in support, saying the present language can chill survivors and people in nontraditional relationships from seeking services or coming forward. "Divorce is incredibly expensive ... this is a simple update to an outdated law," said Z Williams of Bread and Roses, who recounted clients afraid to apply for victim compensation because cohabitation language could be construed against them.
Several committee members urged caution. Representative Espinosa raised concerns that removing "cohabitation" could unintentionally remove statutory coverage for common‑law marriages discussed elsewhere in Colorado law and recommended reinserting a clear common‑law marriage reference or including affirmative defenses for victims. Representative Soper noted the doctrinal difficulty of overlapping Title 14 (domestic relations) and Title 18 (criminal code) definitions.
After discussion and testimony—including survivor advocates, legal aid representatives, and polyamorous community members—the sponsor moved the bill to the committee of the whole with a favorable recommendation. Several members said they would watch floor deliberations and might press clarifying language to preserve protections for parties in prior lawful marriages and to add affirmative defenses where necessary.
What happens next: SB 13 was advanced to the committee of the whole for further consideration; committee members signaled they expect follow‑on drafting or clarifying language could be raised on the floor.
