Colorado has now stepped back from being the first state to potentially remove custody from parents who use their child’s legal name instead of their chosen identity, after a lengthy overnight legislative session led to the passage of HB 25-1312 without the contentious “deadnaming” clause.
The House had previously approved the full version of the bill along party lines, drawing national scrutiny and even concern from its own backers. One Colorado, a key advocacy group, shifted its stance—causing confusion among bill sponsors—by telling The Denver Post it feared the measure could compromise “existing protections” and invite legal challenges, referencing insights from “expert LGBTQIA+ lawyers.”
At Wednesday’s state Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, opponents vastly outnumbered supporters, with a nearly 10-to-1 speaker ratio, according to the Denver Catholic. Among the voices against the bill was the Colorado Catholic Conference, which argued that it enshrines bias against those “with a different belief about human sexuality” than that endorsed by the state.
Lawmakers ultimately passed the bill early Thursday morning, having removed its most hotly debated elements—including penalties for parents in custody battles who “deadname” or “misgender” children. However, details about what other changes were made remain unclear, and the official legislative website had not posted the final version as of Sunday.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to weigh in on another Colorado statute this term—one that bans conversion therapy for minors struggling with their gender identity or sexual orientation. That law, which challenges parental rights and religious freedom, mirrors similar legislation in roughly 20 other states.
The controversy surrounding HB 25-1312 marked a turning point for some Democratic lawmakers, suggesting to critics that they may have overreached. As KKTV reported, Colorado Springs District 11 Board Secretary Jason Jorgenson warned that even saying “one wrong thing at home” or seeking non-affirmative counseling for a gender-questioning child could expose parents to legal risks.
In a gripping account shared during the hearing, Erin Lee testified that her then-12-year-old daughter attempted suicide after school officials covertly “coached” her on how to access gender-affirming care, including obtaining a “care letter” for hormone treatment. Now 16 and thriving, Lee said using her daughter’s birth name “saved her from being a lifelong medical patient,” according to Denver Catholic.
Although senators eliminated the bill’s “coercive control” provision—which would have favored affirming parents in custody disputes—critics remain concerned about what’s left. These include provisions that shield parents who give children hormones or blockers from legal actions in states where such practices are restricted.
Among the approved amendments, some clarify that while public agencies, employers, and housing providers may use legal names for identification, repeated instances of “deadnaming” or “misgendering” after being informed of an individual’s preference can legally be considered discriminatory behavior.
