Clarifying claims that Colorado mandated use of a person's chosen name and pronouns
According to a rumor that spread online in May 2025, Colorado lawmakers passed a law that prohibited referring to individuals by a gender and/or name they no longer identify with.
The rumor appeared to originate from an outdated and exaggerated interpretation of the Kelly Loving Act, a real law passed in Colorado in May 2025.
The Kelly Loving Act did not make it illegal to use names or genders that individuals no longer identify with. Rather, it clarified preexisting legislation that allowed plaintiffs to use those actions as evidence in civil discrimination cases.
In practice, this means choosing not to use a person's chosen name or pronouns can be used as evidence of harassment in an anti-discrimination case involving employment, housing or places of public accommodation. It does not mean that the act of misgendering or deadnaming someone is in itself illegal.
In late May 2025, a rumor spread online that Colorado lawmakers prohibited refusing to use a person's chosen name and pronouns in line with their gender identity.
The claims spread on X and Facebook. Some of these claims specified that the law bans "misgendering" and "deadnaming" individuals — in other words, referring to someone by a gender and/or name they no longer identify with.
However, these rumors appear to be spreading an outdated and exaggerated understanding of a legitimate law passed in Colorado on May 16, 2025, to clarify legal protections for transgender people. The bill, named the Kelly Loving Act after a transgender woman who was killed in an anti-LGBTQ+ mass shooting at a Colorado gay bar, underwent major revisions before it became law.
An older version of the bill sought to specifically define misgendering and deadnaming as discriminatory acts under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination in the workplace, housing and in places of public accommodation such as parks, businesses and libraries. However, both terms were taken out of the legislation. Instead, the law as it stands — as of this writing — states that refusing to use a person's chosen name or respect how a person chooses to be addressed can be used as evidence in a complaint under the state's anti-discrimination act.
Here's what that means.
Before the Kelly Loving Act became law, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act already prohibited discrimination on the basis of "gender identity" and "gender expression" due to a law passed in 2021.
That bill defined gender expression as "an individual's way of reflecting and expressing the individual's gender to the outside world, typically demonstrated through appearance, dress, and behavior." It also defined gender identity as "an individual's innate sense of the individual's own gender, which may or may not correspond with the individual's sex assigned at birth."
The Kelly Loving Act sought to "further clarify that not utilizing an individual's chosen name is and can be used as evidence of discrimination in a gender expression discrimination case," said state Democratic Rep. Rebekah Stewart, a sponsor of the bill. It also added more details to what "gender expression" means under the law, such as "how a person chooses to be addressed."
Some claims said that Colorado made it a "crime" to misgender or deadname someone. That is simply not true, as penalties for violating the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act are civil, not criminal — any person who violates the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act can be fined $5,000 per plaintiff and/or other monetary damages, as of a 2025 amendment to the law.
It is also worth noting that filing a complaint under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act does not automatically mean an employer or accused party may be fined. For example, with employment cases, there must be "clear and convincing evidence that the defendant engaged in a discriminatory or unfair employment practice with malice or reckless indifference to the rights of the plaintiff," according to a 2014 Colorado Bar Association publication (see Page 4-3 under "Remedies Under CADA").
However, "good-faith efforts to comply" and "prevent discriminatory and unfair practices in the workplace" would result in no punitive damages for the defendant, per the publication.
Snopes requested a full copy of the most recent version of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act and will update this story if we find this language has changed. We also reached out to various law firms and civil rights groups for more information about how the Kelly Loving Act may be implemented in connection with CADA and await replies.
Previous versions of the Kelly Loving Act specified inclusion of deadnaming and misgendering as acts of discrimination under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act.
For example, see the bill as introduced, which on Page 9 defined deadnaming as "purposefully, and with the intent to disregard the individual's gender identity or gender expression, refer[ring] to an individual by their birth name rather than their chosen name." Similarly, misgendering was defined on the same page as "purposefully, and with the intent to disregard the individual's gender identity or gender expression, refer[ring] to an individual using an honorific or pronoun that conflicts with the individual's gender identity or gender expression."
The bill as introduced also said on Page 2 that it defined "deadnaming and misgendering as discriminatory acts in the 'Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act', and prohibit[ed] these discriminatory acts in places of public accommodation."
In contrast, the bill as signed by the governor into law — available on the bill page — made no explicit mention of deadnaming or misgendering. Instead, it simply adds "chosen name" and other details to the definition of "gender expression," which, again, is already protected under the anti-discrimination act. See the relevant part of the bill, which is on Page 5, below, with the capitalized parts representing what the bill adds to the preexisting law:
(3.5) "CHOSEN NAME" MEANS A NAME THAT AN INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS TO BE KNOWN AS IN CONNECTION TO THE INDIVIDUAL'S DISABILITY, RACE, CREED, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, GENDER EXPRESSION, MARITAL STATUS, FAMILIAL STATUS, NATIONAL ORIGIN, OR ANCESTRY, SO LONG AS THE NAME DOES NOT CONTAIN OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE AND THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT REQUESTING THE NAME FOR FRIVOLOUS PURPOSES.
(9) "Gender expression" means an individual's way of reflecting and expressing the individual's gender to the outside world, typically demonstrated through appearance, dress, and behavior, CHOSEN NAME, AND HOW THE INDIVIDUAL CHOOSES TO BE ADDRESSED.
It is worth noting that repeated misgendering and deadnaming have already been used as evidence in successful anti-discrimination federal court cases. See, for example, a landmark 2015 case known as Lusardi v. Department of the Army, which found that the Army discriminated against a transgender woman, Tamara Lusardi, on the basis of sex in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. One of the pieces of evidence used in the case was the repeated use of her birth name and male pronouns.
Thus, the Colorado bill does not outright prohibit people from using a name or pronoun at odds with a person's gender expression — it simply strengthens preexisting anti-discrimination law in the state.
In practice, this means that choosing not to use a person's chosen name or pronouns can be used as evidence of harassment in an anti-discrimination case involving employment, housing or places of public accommodation. It does not mean that the act of misgendering or deadnaming someone is in itself illegal.
"2023 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 24 - GOVERNMENT - STATE (§§ 24-1-101 — 24-116-102) :: PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENTS (§§ 24-30-101 — 24-36-306) :: Article 34 - DEPARTMENT of REGULATORY AGENCIES (§§ 24-34-101 — 24-34-1008) :: Part 6 - DISCRIMINATION in PLACES of PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION (§§ 24-34-601 — 24-34-605) :: Section 24-34-601 - [Effective until 8/7/2024] Discrimination in Places of Public Accommodation - Definition." Justia Law, law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-24/principal-departments/article-34/part-6/section-24-34-601/. Accessed 3 June 2025.
ENGROSSED a BILL for an ACT CONCERNING LEGAL PROTECTIONS for TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS. leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025A/bills/2025a_1312_eng.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Gallagher, Sean, et al. The Practitioner's Guide to COLORADO EMPLOYMENT LAW SECOND EDITION VOLUMES 1 & 2 the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act a Chapter in the Practitioner's Guide to Colorado Employment Law. www.rmlawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/04-Employment-Chap-4-Class-Materials.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Garcia, Lorena, et al. A BILL for an ACT 101 CONCERNING LEGAL PROTECTIONS for TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS. leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025A/bills/2025a_1312_01.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2025.
---. "HOUSE BILL 25-1312." Https://Leg.colorado.gov, 16 May 2025, leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2025a_1312_signed.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2025.
"Gender Identity Expression Anti-Discrimination | Colorado General Assembly." Leg.colorado.gov, leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb21-1108. Accessed 3 June 2025.
"Home | Colorado Civil Rights Division." Ccrd.colorado.gov, ccrd.colorado.gov/. Accessed 3 June 2025.
"Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals | Colorado General Assembly." Colorado.gov, Colorado General Assembly, leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1312. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Pham, Xoai. "Groundbreaking EEOC Ruling Finds the Army Discriminated against Transgender Employee by Denying Bathroom Access, Pronouns - Transgender Law Center." Transgender Law Center, 8 Apr. 2015, transgenderlawcenter.org/groundbreaking-eeoc-ruling-finds-the-army-discriminated-against-transgender-employee-by-denying-bathroom-access-pronouns/. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Powell, Laurel. "HRC Mourns Kelly Loving, 'Loving Friend & Caring Person,' Killed in Club Q Shooting." Human Rights Campaign, 29 Nov. 2022, www.hrc.org/news/hrc-mourns-kelly-loving-loving-friend-caring-person-killed-in-club-q-shooting. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Soper, Matt, et al. HOUSE BILL 24-1124. leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2024a_1124_signed.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Zokaie, Yara, et al. HOUSE BILL 25-1239 . 22 May 2025, leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2025a_1239_signed.pdf. Accessed 3 June 2025.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Clarifying claims that Colorado mandated use of a person's chosen name and pronouns
According to a rumor that spread online in May 2025, Colorado lawmakers passed a law that prohibited referring to individuals by a gender and/or name they no longer identify with. The rumor appeared to originate from an outdated and exaggerated interpretation of the Kelly Loving Act, a real law passed in Colorado in May 2025. The Kelly Loving Act did not make it illegal to use names or genders that individuals no longer identify with. Rather, it clarified preexisting legislation that allowed plaintiffs to use those actions as evidence in civil discrimination cases. In practice, this means choosing not to use a person's chosen name or pronouns can be used as evidence of harassment in an anti-discrimination case involving employment, housing or places of public accommodation. It does not mean that the act of misgendering or deadnaming someone is in itself illegal. In late May 2025, a rumor spread online that Colorado lawmakers prohibited refusing to use a person's chosen name and pronouns in line with their gender identity. The claims spread on X and Facebook. Some of these claims specified that the law bans "misgendering" and "deadnaming" individuals — in other words, referring to someone by a gender and/or name they no longer identify with. However, these rumors appear to be spreading an outdated and exaggerated understanding of a legitimate law passed in Colorado on May 16, 2025, to clarify legal protections for transgender people. The bill, named the Kelly Loving Act after a transgender woman who was killed in an anti-LGBTQ+ mass shooting at a Colorado gay bar, underwent major revisions before it became law. An older version of the bill sought to specifically define misgendering and deadnaming as discriminatory acts under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination in the workplace, housing and in places of public accommodation such as parks, businesses and libraries. However, both terms were taken out of the legislation. Instead, the law as it stands — as of this writing — states that refusing to use a person's chosen name or respect how a person chooses to be addressed can be used as evidence in a complaint under the state's anti-discrimination act. Here's what that means. Before the Kelly Loving Act became law, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act already prohibited discrimination on the basis of "gender identity" and "gender expression" due to a law passed in 2021. That bill defined gender expression as "an individual's way of reflecting and expressing the individual's gender to the outside world, typically demonstrated through appearance, dress, and behavior." It also defined gender identity as "an individual's innate sense of the individual's own gender, which may or may not correspond with the individual's sex assigned at birth." The Kelly Loving Act sought to "further clarify that not utilizing an individual's chosen name is and can be used as evidence of discrimination in a gender expression discrimination case," said state Democratic Rep. Rebekah Stewart, a sponsor of the bill. It also added more details to what "gender expression" means under the law, such as "how a person chooses to be addressed." Some claims said that Colorado made it a "crime" to misgender or deadname someone. That is simply not true, as penalties for violating the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act are civil, not criminal — any person who violates the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act can be fined $5,000 per plaintiff and/or other monetary damages, as of a 2025 amendment to the law. It is also worth noting that filing a complaint under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act does not automatically mean an employer or accused party may be fined. For example, with employment cases, there must be "clear and convincing evidence that the defendant engaged in a discriminatory or unfair employment practice with malice or reckless indifference to the rights of the plaintiff," according to a 2014 Colorado Bar Association publication (see Page 4-3 under "Remedies Under CADA"). However, "good-faith efforts to comply" and "prevent discriminatory and unfair practices in the workplace" would result in no punitive damages for the defendant, per the publication. Snopes requested a full copy of the most recent version of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act and will update this story if we find this language has changed. We also reached out to various law firms and civil rights groups for more information about how the Kelly Loving Act may be implemented in connection with CADA and await replies. Previous versions of the Kelly Loving Act specified inclusion of deadnaming and misgendering as acts of discrimination under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. For example, see the bill as introduced, which on Page 9 defined deadnaming as "purposefully, and with the intent to disregard the individual's gender identity or gender expression, refer[ring] to an individual by their birth name rather than their chosen name." Similarly, misgendering was defined on the same page as "purposefully, and with the intent to disregard the individual's gender identity or gender expression, refer[ring] to an individual using an honorific or pronoun that conflicts with the individual's gender identity or gender expression." The bill as introduced also said on Page 2 that it defined "deadnaming and misgendering as discriminatory acts in the 'Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act', and prohibit[ed] these discriminatory acts in places of public accommodation." In contrast, the bill as signed by the governor into law — available on the bill page — made no explicit mention of deadnaming or misgendering. Instead, it simply adds "chosen name" and other details to the definition of "gender expression," which, again, is already protected under the anti-discrimination act. See the relevant part of the bill, which is on Page 5, below, with the capitalized parts representing what the bill adds to the preexisting law: (3.5) "CHOSEN NAME" MEANS A NAME THAT AN INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS TO BE KNOWN AS IN CONNECTION TO THE INDIVIDUAL'S DISABILITY, RACE, CREED, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, GENDER EXPRESSION, MARITAL STATUS, FAMILIAL STATUS, NATIONAL ORIGIN, OR ANCESTRY, SO LONG AS THE NAME DOES NOT CONTAIN OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE AND THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT REQUESTING THE NAME FOR FRIVOLOUS PURPOSES. (9) "Gender expression" means an individual's way of reflecting and expressing the individual's gender to the outside world, typically demonstrated through appearance, dress, and behavior, CHOSEN NAME, AND HOW THE INDIVIDUAL CHOOSES TO BE ADDRESSED. It is worth noting that repeated misgendering and deadnaming have already been used as evidence in successful anti-discrimination federal court cases. See, for example, a landmark 2015 case known as Lusardi v. Department of the Army, which found that the Army discriminated against a transgender woman, Tamara Lusardi, on the basis of sex in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. One of the pieces of evidence used in the case was the repeated use of her birth name and male pronouns. Thus, the Colorado bill does not outright prohibit people from using a name or pronoun at odds with a person's gender expression — it simply strengthens preexisting anti-discrimination law in the state. In practice, this means that choosing not to use a person's chosen name or pronouns can be used as evidence of harassment in an anti-discrimination case involving employment, housing or places of public accommodation. It does not mean that the act of misgendering or deadnaming someone is in itself illegal. "2023 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 24 - GOVERNMENT - STATE (§§ 24-1-101 — 24-116-102) :: PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENTS (§§ 24-30-101 — 24-36-306) :: Article 34 - DEPARTMENT of REGULATORY AGENCIES (§§ 24-34-101 — 24-34-1008) :: Part 6 - DISCRIMINATION in PLACES of PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION (§§ 24-34-601 — 24-34-605) :: Section 24-34-601 - [Effective until 8/7/2024] Discrimination in Places of Public Accommodation - Definition." Justia Law, Accessed 3 June 2025. ENGROSSED a BILL for an ACT CONCERNING LEGAL PROTECTIONS for TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS. Accessed 3 June 2025. Gallagher, Sean, et al. The Practitioner's Guide to COLORADO EMPLOYMENT LAW SECOND EDITION VOLUMES 1 & 2 the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act a Chapter in the Practitioner's Guide to Colorado Employment Law. Accessed 3 June 2025. Garcia, Lorena, et al. A BILL for an ACT 101 CONCERNING LEGAL PROTECTIONS for TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS. Accessed 3 June 2025. ---. "HOUSE BILL 25-1312." 16 May 2025, Accessed 3 June 2025. "Gender Identity Expression Anti-Discrimination | Colorado General Assembly." Accessed 3 June 2025. "Home | Colorado Civil Rights Division." Accessed 3 June 2025. "Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals | Colorado General Assembly." Colorado General Assembly, Accessed 3 June 2025. Pham, Xoai. "Groundbreaking EEOC Ruling Finds the Army Discriminated against Transgender Employee by Denying Bathroom Access, Pronouns - Transgender Law Center." Transgender Law Center, 8 Apr. 2015, Accessed 3 June 2025. Powell, Laurel. "HRC Mourns Kelly Loving, 'Loving Friend & Caring Person,' Killed in Club Q Shooting." Human Rights Campaign, 29 Nov. 2022, Accessed 3 June 2025. Soper, Matt, et al. HOUSE BILL 24-1124. Accessed 3 June 2025. Zokaie, Yara, et al. HOUSE BILL 25-1239 . 22 May 2025, Accessed 3 June 2025.
Politico
02-06-2025
- Politico
Lawmakers push for transparency in 340B program
Beat Memo New York lawmakers are looking to create transparency in a drug rebate program offered to hospitals serving low-income communities, with a state mandate to report how the federal program's revenue is used, POLITICO Pro's Katelyn Cordero reports. The legislation — which is the Assembly Health Committee and expected to be introduced in the Senate in the coming days — would require hospitals participating in the 340B drug discount program to report their use of funds acquired through the program to the state Department of Health. The program's original intent was to have safety-net hospitals invest the profits back into the community or pass savings directly to patients, but lawmakers have raised concerns about where the money is actually going. 'It's just a pretty straightforward transparency bill reporting on information that, in theory, should otherwise already be available,' bill sponsor Assemblymember Amanda Septimo told POLITICO. 'So it's really compiling and sharing information, not necessarily new data collection. We don't expect it to be burdensome.' A separate piece of legislation reintroduced in January, known as the 340B Prescription Drug Anti-Discrimination Act, would bar pharmaceutical companies from imposing administrative requirements that could discourage providers from participating in the program. Septimo said such an expansion of the program should only be considered with the proper guardrails in place. 'The (bills) should work in tandem,' she said. 'It's difficult to make a meaningful case for the expansion of something when you don't have any meaningful data to report, with respect to how it's working as it exists.' The legislation introduced by Septimo in March would require that hospitals report all 340B savings and payments associated with drugs in the program, as well as the total number of prescriptions and the percentage of prescriptions covered by the program. The Department of Health would be required to post the collected data on a public site. Hospitals would be required to report data on the program by April 1, 2026. IN OTHER NEWS: — One Brooklyn Health is partnering with NYU Langone to expand access to kidney transplants in Brooklyn. The health system's new program will offer transplant evaluations, clinical testing and specialist consultations to patients with advanced kidney disease at Brookdale Hospital. Patients will also receive support from social workers, financial counselors and a care navigator. — Gov. Kathy Hochul announced four appointments to the newly restructured board of the Nassau Health Care Corporation, which oversees the financially struggling Nassau University Medical Center on Long Island: Stuart Rabinowitz, Amy Flores, Dean Mihaltses and Lisa Warren. Under a new state law that took effect Sunday, the corporation is subject to several new oversight measures and must submit a study by Dec. 1, 2026, exploring options to strengthen the medical center. ON THE AGENDA: — Wednesday at 10 a.m. The Public Health and Health Planning Council's committee on establishment and project review meets. — Thursday, 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. The New York State Traumatic Brain Injury Services Coordinating Council meets. MAKING ROUNDS: — Kathleen Sikkema will serve as interim dean of the Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, effective July 1. She succeeds Linda P. Fried, who previously announced plans to step down at the end of the academic year. GOT TIPS? Send story ideas and feedback to Maya Kaufman at mkaufman@ and Katelyn Cordero at kcordero@ Want to receive this newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to POLITICO Pro. You'll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day's biggest stories. What you may have missed — Democratic lawmakers negotiated a deal with the state Education Department s last week on a measure that would expand access to birth control for New Yorkers, as the state faces provider shortages and federal attacks on reproductive health care. Two bills moving through the Senate and Assembly are aimed at allowing pharmacists to administer birth control shots without a provider's prescription and requiring private insurance to pay pharmacists for consulting with patients seeking birth control prescriptions, POLITICO Pro's Katelyn Cordero reports. — An issue brief by the New York Health Plan Association, which found the state mandates insurance coverage of more than 45 specific treatments or services, recommended that the state develop a process to review the cost of such requirements. 'The collective impact of mandated benefits contributes to the growth in health insurance premiums, adds to the cost of coverage for everyone – consumers, employers, union benefit funds and the state – and runs counter to efforts to make New York more affordable,' HPA President and CEO Eric Linzer said in a statement. 'Before new mandated benefits are passed, there should be a process to analyze their impact on the affordability of coverage, so that there's a clear understanding of what they cost.' Odds and Ends NOW WE KNOW — A new Covid strain has landed in New York. TODAY'S TIP — Easily distracted? Here are some ways to improve your attention span. STUDY THIS — Ending water fluoridation could cost nearly $10 billion over five years, and tooth decay would also rise, according to a Harvard analysis. What We're Reading — State health regulators signal support for long-awaited trauma center in the Rockaways. (Crain's New York Business) — The dizzying rise of MAHA warrior Calley Means, RFK Jr.'s right-hand man. (Vanity Fair) — Medicare plots ambitious tech agenda guided by former Palantir and Main Street Health executives. (STAT) — American doctors are moving to Canada to escape the Trump administration. (KFF Health News) Around POLITICO — Via Carmen Paun and Robbie Gramer: State Department explains why it's reorganizing its global health security bureau. — Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst spars with town hall crowd over Medicaid, Cheyanne M. Daniels reports. MISSED A ROUNDUP? Get caught up on the New York Health Care Newsletter.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Yahoo
Lawsuit filed over Kelly Loving Act
(COLORADO SPRINGS)– Multiple groups are suing the state of Colorado over the Kelly Loving Act only days after Governor Jared Polis made it a law. The new law expands transgender protections in Colorado, with those behind the suit claiming it violates free speech and parental rights. 'What's at stake here is the protections for transgender Coloradans,' said Ollie Glessner, communications and advocacy director for Inside Out. The Kelly Loving Act is named after a transgender woman who was killed in 2022 during the Club Q shooting in Colorado Springs. Under the new law, intentionally misgendering or dead-naming someone is considered a discriminatory act. 'The bill should have never been written,' said Darcy Schoening, and member of Moms for Liberty. The Kelly Loving Act has been a controversial discussion topic since it was proposed, and now it is heading to court after parent advocacy groups filed the lawsuit to make sure the law does not go into effect. 'Colorado now is passing these laws to make sure that we keep our protections in state no matter what, and not only that, but we also expand them to some of the things that are under attack right now,' said Glessner. But some parents do not agree with how the new law will affect their children. 'My daughter doesn't have the ability to choose who she shares her safe spaces with,' said Schoening. Kelly Loving Act aims to reinforce existing transgender rights The act allows a person's chosen name to qualify as gender expression, which is protected under the Colorado anti-discrimination act. That means if a person intentionally misgenders or dead-names a transgender person, they are breaking state law. 'I dare you to come after me for telling the truth, for calling a man, a man,' said Schoening. When Glessner first changed their name, they said it was hard on their parents to understand at first. 'When I changed my name, I know it was really difficult for my family because they had named me for a purpose, you know, and that purpose then seemed lost or changed for them,' they said. The group Defending Education is behind the lawsuit, filed on behalf of the Colorado Parents Advocacy Network and Protect Kids Colorado groups, and they think the law could violate their first and 14th amendment rights. 'To compel somebody to refer to somebody as a gender that they're not and say that it's criminal if the person doesn't do it, is a really dangerous precedent,' said Schoening. But Glessner said it is not compelled speech, instead it is respect: 'People will say that making them call someone by their chosen name or pronouns is compelled speech, and frankly, nothing else in our society operates that way.' The new act would also impact schools, setting new requirements for dress codes and bathrooms for school districts to follow. 'When you take rights, and you say, my feelings are now more important than those of a child or a parent or a family member and law should be written for my feelings,' said Schoening. 'Your feelings are valid if you're grieving the loss of what you hoped for your child,' said Glessner. State Attorney General Phil Wiser, who was named in the lawsuit, said he is not commenting at this time, and neither is Governor Jared Polis. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
