Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Media Search Warrants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Colorado committee advances bill to shorten social‑media search‑warrant response time after Evergreen shooting
Summary
The House Judiciary Committee advanced legislation that would require social platforms to respond faster to judicial search requests and report serious moderation actions to law enforcement after the Evergreen High School shooting exposed long delays in identifying an online threat.
The House Judiciary Committee advanced House Bill 12‑55, a bill sponsors say is aimed at preventing future attacks like the September shooting at Evergreen High School by shrinking platform turnaround times for lawful requests and creating a limited duty to report.
Sponsor Representative Story said federal searches tied to a July tip took weeks and that social platforms often take the full statutory time to respond. The amendment package adopted in committee narrowed the duty to report so platforms must notify local law enforcement when they take an adverse action (removal, suspension, termination) under the platform’s own policies against threatening or criminal conduct.
Sheriff Reggie Marinelli said the FBI and Jefferson County used a multi‑step warrant process that ultimately identified the Evergreen shooter only after the attack. Marinelli and Jefferson County investigators urged faster cooperation so law enforcement has a chance to investigate while threats remain actionable. Sergeant Paul Smoker and other school resource officers described time‑sensitive investigations and urged urgency.
Students, parents, teachers and victim advocates gave emotional testimony about the traumatic, ongoing effects of the Evergreen shooting and said online posts and communities contained warning signs months earlier. Tyler Guyton, student body president at Evergreen High School, told the committee the community expects action to reduce the risk of repeat events.
Opponents from the technology and civil‑liberties communities warned the bill’s current definitions and operational requirements could sweep in small volunteer‑run federated services, impose impractical 24/7 obligations and raise Fourth Amendment/state‑action concerns. Technologists and privacy advocates urged clearer thresholds, data‑retention limits and procedural protections to avoid mass false positives and unintended privacy harms.
The committee adopted two amendments (L1 and L2) that narrowed the duty‑to‑report trigger and exempted certain reproductive‑health‑related enforcement from reporting. Sponsors committed to continued stakeholder work to tighten constitutional and operational language before further floor consideration. The measure was advanced to the Committee of the Whole by a 7‑4 committee vote.
What’s next: HB 12‑55 will be considered by the Committee of the Whole, where sponsors and opponents said they expect continued negotiations over definitions, the scale of covered platforms and legal safeguards to protect privacy and free‑speech rights.
