Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Human Trafficking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Colorado committee hears survivors as sponsors push tougher penalties for buyers in child‑exploitation bill
Summary
Survivors, prosecutors and advocates urged the Colorado House Judiciary Committee to pass Senate Bill 15, which replaces terms such as “child prostitution” with “commercial sexual activity with a child,” tightens Internet‑luring offenses and increases mandatory penalties for adults who buy commercial sexual access to children. Lawmakers debated a 364‑day jail condition tied to probation and adopted an amendment before sending the bill onward.
The Colorado House Judiciary Committee spent hours hearing emotional testimony and legal questions about Senate Bill 15, a measure that sponsors said would modernize the state’s terminology and increase penalties for adults who purchase commercial sexual access to children.
Minority Leader Melody Caldwell, the bill’s prime sponsor, opened the hearing by urging the committee to “stand with survivors” and to replace language that, she said, wrongly frames children as choosing to sell sex. Caldwell said the legislation was drafted with survivors, advocates and prosecutors and noted the bill had passed the Senate unanimously.
Co‑prime sponsor Majority Leader Dwayne Duran told the committee the measure “removes outdated terms like child prostitution and replaces them with commercial sexual activity with the child,” aligns Colorado law with federal definitions and raises penalties for pandering, inducement and patronizing a minor.
Prosecutors and local law‑enforcement officials backed the bill. Brian Mason, district attorney for the 17th Judicial District, told the committee trafficking “happens here” and said he supported changes that would make prosecutions clearer and increase deterrence. Abby Hegarty, a senior deputy district attorney from the 23rd Judicial District, described prosecutions she had handled and said mandatory sentencing in some cases would create a stronger deterrent effect.
Survivors and victim‑service providers gave the committee some of the clearest moments in the room. “When I was 16…my perpetrator was a wealthy man with unlimited resources and no fear of incarceration,” said Cameron Fenning‑Meyer, a survivor who asked the committee for “meaningful accountability” for buyers. Janelle Goodrich of FSTS, a survivor‑advocacy group, said demand drives trafficking: “The Johns flow free here,” she testified, and that must change.
Opponents, including the ACLU of Colorado and the Colorado State Public Defender’s Office, warned that mandatory minimums can remove judicial discretion, risk mass incarceration and nonetheless fail to address underlying drivers such as poverty and lack of services. “Sentencing is a job for judges, not for legislatures or prosecutors,” Anaya Robinson of the ACLU said, urging caution on mandatory jail terms.
Committee members pressed witnesses on details ranging from fiscal notes to the legal precedent for requiring 364 days in county jail as a condition of probation. Witnesses cited case law involving sexually oriented offenses and specialty courts; others warned that county jails lack programming that could make such a sentence clinically useful.
The committee adopted a sponsor amendment (L007) clarifying that the 90‑day probation cap in general probation law does not apply to the bill’s solicitation provision, and then voted to send the amended bill to the committee of the whole with a favorable recommendation.
What happens next: the bill was moved to the committee of the whole for further deliberation, where sponsors and opponents will resume negotiations on statutory details and implementation questions.
Sources: testimony from bill sponsors, prosecutors, survivor advocates and civil‑liberties groups at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Senate Bill 15, March 24, 2026. Quotations are from committee testimony and are attributed to the speakers who made them.
