Colorado

State constitutional guarantees regarding right to education

• Article IX, Section 2 of the Colorado Constitution provides:

• "The general assembly shall, as soon as practicable, provide for the establishment and maintenance of a thorough and uniform system of free public schools throughout the state, wherein all residents of the state, between the ages of six and twenty-one years, may be educated gratuitously. One or more public schools shall be maintained in each school district within the state, at least three months in each year; any school district failing to have such school shall not be entitled to receive any portion of the school fund for that year."(Colo. Const. Art. IX, § 2.) 

Case law and legislative history defining and interpreting the right to education

• In Lujan v. Colorado State Board of Education (Colo. 1982), the Colorado Supreme Court addressed whether the state’s public school financing system was unconstitutional by violating the Equal Protection Clause or Article IX, Section 2 of Colorado's Constitution. 

• Equal Protection: Plaintiffs argued that disparities in funding between school districts, largely due to differences in local property tax bases, resulted in unequal educational opportunities and thus infringed upon the constitutional right to education. Where no fundamental right, suspect classification, or gender classification is involved, the court inquires whether the state action is rationally related to a legitimate state purpose.( Lujan v. Colorado State Bd. of Educ., 649 P.2d 1005, 1016 (Colo., 1982).) First, the court found that education is not a fundamental right under the United States Constitution, and therefore, is not subject to strict judicial scrutiny. Id. The court then found that wealth-based classifications, by themselves, do not create a suspect classification under the Colorado Constitution.  (Id. at 1022.) Since no suspect class or fundamental right was involved, rational basis review was the appropriate standard to analyze Colorado’s public school finance system. The court held that the Colorado public school finance system was rationally related to the legitimate state purpose of controlling the public debt. (Id. at 1024.)

• Thorough and Uniform System: The Court then analyzed whether Colorado’s public school finance system violated the Colorado Constitution’s guarantee of a “thorough and uniform” system of free public schools contained in Article IX, § 2. The Court held that while the constitution requires a “thorough and uniform” system, it does not mandate absolute equality in funding or resources. The Court found that the state’s system met the constitutional standard as long as it provided a basic level of educational opportunity to all students, even if disparities existed. The decision established that the right to education in Colorado is not a guarantee of equal funding, but rather of access to a basic, adequate education.( Id. at 1025.) 

• The Court reaffirmed this approach in Lobato v. State (Colo. 2013), where plaintiffs challenged the adequacy of the public school finance system under the Colorado constitution’s “thorough and uniform” education clause. Plaintiffs, including students and school districts, contended that the local school districts' lack of sufficient financial resources, coupled with the public school financing system's restrictions on spending, prevents the districts from exerting meaningful control over educational instruction and quality in violation of the Local Control Clause. The Colorado Supreme Court held that the state’s school finance system is rationally related to the “thorough and uniform” mandate and that the financing system complies with the Local Control Clause because it affords local school districts control over locally-raised funds. The Court added that the state constitution does not require the legislature to adopt any particular allocation of funds. The Court emphasized the legislature’s broad discretion in educational policy and funding, and concluded that the judiciary should not second-guess legislative judgments absent a clear constitutional violation.(Lobato v. State, 304 P.3d 1132 (Colo., 2013).) 

State constitutional protections regarding non-discrimination and equity

• Article IX, Section 8 of the Colorado Constitution prohibits religious testing and racial discrimination in public schools. Section 8 provides, “No religious test or qualification shall ever be required of any person as a condition of admission into any public educational institution of the state, either as a teacher or student; and no teacher or student of any such institution shall ever be required to attend or participate in any religious service whatsoever. No sectarian tenets or doctrines shall ever be taught in the public school, nor shall any distinction or classification of pupils be made on account of race or color, nor shall any pupil be assigned or transported to any public educational institution for the purpose of achieving racial balance.”(Colo. Const. Art. IX, § 8)

State law equivalents to Title VI, Title IX, Section 504, and the Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA) 

The Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), codified at C.R.S. § 24-34-301 et seq, is the state’s primary statutory equivalent to major federal civil rights laws. CADA prohibits discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations (including public schools) on the basis of race, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, and other protected characteristics. 

State Equivalents to: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance):

• CADA (C.R.S.A. § 24-34-601 et seq.) (prohibits discrimination in places of public accommodation, including public schools)

• Colorado Constitution, Article IX, Section 8 (prohibits racial discrimination in public schools)

State Equivalents to: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance):

• Colorado equivalents:

• CADA (C.R.S.A. § 24-34-601 et seq)

• Senate Bill 23-296 (prohibits harassment or discrimination directed at a student or group of students because of that student's or group's membership in, or perceived membership in, a protected class)

State Equivalents to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (prohibits discrimination based on disability in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance):

• Colorado equivalents:

• CADA (C.R.S.A. § 24-34-801 et seq)

• Exceptional Children’s Educational Act (ECEA) – C.R.S. § 22-20-101 et seq: ECEA is Colorado’s primary special education law, aligning with the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).The Colorado Department of Education (CDE) enforces ECEA through monitoring, technical assistance, and complaint investigations. ECEA governs:

• Eligibility criteria for special education services

• Individualized Education Program (IEP) development

• Procedural safeguards and dispute resolution

• Child Find obligations (identifying students with disabilities)

State Equivalents to Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA) of 1974 (prohibits denial of equal educational opportunity based on race, color, national origin, language, sex, religion and disability including failure to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers):

• Colorado equivalents:

• CADA (C.R.S.A. § 24-34-601 et seq)

• Colorado Constitution, Article IX, Section 8 (prohibits racial discrimination in public schools)

• Colorado English Language Proficiency Act (ELPA), C.R.S.A § 22-24-101 et seq. (supports the requirement to provide an evidence-based English language development program for all identified English learners, requires the state to enhance educators' effectiveness in supporting English language development, and requires the state to appropriate and allocate moneys to local education providers to help ensure that English language learners are postsecondary and workforce ready at graduation)    

• ELPA requires annual reporting, use of state funds for evidence based programs, and monitoring of student progress toward English proficiency,

Additional state civil rights protections that go beyond federal requirements (e.g., protections for LGBTQ+ students, multilingual learners, undocumented students)

• Generally: CADA explicitly includes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes, providing clear protections that may not be as explicitly covered under federal law. 

• The “Kelly Loving Act” (HB25-1312) – Enhanced Protections for Transgender Individuals: The Kelly Loving Act (signed into law on May 16, 2025) amends CADA to enhance protections for transgender individuals, including the right to use preferred names and pronouns and access facilities aligning with their gender identity.(https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1312.) 

• Section 6 of the Kelly Loving Act provides that, if a local education provide enacts or enforces a policy related to names, that policy must be inclusive of all reasons that a student might adopt a name that differs from the student's legal name.

• Section 7 requires that a dress code adopted by a school district board of education or by an institute charter school board must allow each student to choose from any of the options provided in the dress code policy.

• Section 8 defines the term "chosen name" for purposes of the CADA as “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.” Section 8 also adds "chosen name and how the individual chooses to be expressed" as forms of gender expression for purposes of CADA. (https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2025a_1312_signed.pdf.)

• Senate Bill 23-296 (SB23-296): Prevent Harassment And Discrimination In Schools

• SB23-296, signed into law on June 6, 2023, aims to ensure that students who are subject to harassment or discrimination are provided a prompt and fair process for reporting harassment or discrimination, information about their rights and status of the complaint, and supportive measures or accommodations to remedy the impact of the harassment or discrimination. (https://www.cde.state.co.us/dropoutprevention/sb23-296concerningprotectionsforstudentsagainstdiscrimination). 

• It requires public schools that enroll student in grades Kindergarten through 12 to, among other things: accept formal reports of harassment or discrimination in writing or in person; post notices describing how a student can report harassment or discrimination; adopt procedures for investigating reports of harassment or discrimination. SB23-296 requires schools to report information about the harassment and discrimination reports it receives to the school district once per year, and requires the school district to report the information it receives from each school to the Colorado Department of Education once per year. The act also exempts excused absences related to harassment or discrimination (for example, for therapy, medical, legal, or victim services appointment) from the existing school attendance requirement.(https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb23-296.)

• House Bill 24-1039 (HB24-1039): Non-Legal Name Changes

• Signed into law in April 2024, HB24-103a9 mandates that school personnel address students by their chosen names in all school and extracurricular settings. The law defines a “chosen name” as any name a student requests to be known by, reflecting their gender identity. Knowingly or intentionally refusing to use a student’s chosen name is deemed discriminatory. (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1039.) Schools must implement a written policy to honor such requests. Schools are required to use the preferred name in the classroom and on items like rosters, the yearbook and the student’s ID. Refusal to do so is deemed a form of discrimination, and the act allows a student who is subject to discrimination as a result of failure to address the student by their chosen name to file a complaint under Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) Section 22-1-143 (2) or file a complaint under the public school's policy adopted pursuant to Title IX of the Federal Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. secs. 1681 et seq).(https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2024a_1039_signed.pdf.) 

• C.R.S. § 22-2-144 – Bullying Prevention and Education Policies (“Ashawnty’s Law”) Mandates the development of a model policy to guide school districts, charter schools, and the Charter School Institute. Key Requirements:

• Research best practices from other states.

• Update the model policy every three years.

• Use a stakeholder process that includes parents of bullied students.

• Publish the model policy and research findings on CDE’s website.

State law protections regarding color of law or pattern/practice liability for law enforcement in schools

• Removal of Qualified Immunity:

• In 2020, Colorado passed Senate Bill 20-217, the Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Act, which made it unlawful for any governmental authority to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by peace officers that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the constitution or laws of the United States or the state of Colorado. The Act also expressly eliminates qualified immunity as a defense for law enforcement officers in state civil rights actions. Under the new law, any person—including students—may bring a civil action against a peace officer who subjects them to a deprivation of rights secured by the Colorado Constitution.

• SB 20-217 defines "peace officer" as any person employed by a law enforcement agency who is certified by the Colorado Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Board (see C.R.S. § 24-31-902(3)). The term "law enforcement agency" is defined as any agency or unit of government that employs peace officers (C.R.S. § 24-31-902(2)). In Colorado, school resource officers (SROs) are generally POST-certified peace officers employed by local police departments or sheriff’s offices and assigned to schools through agreements with school districts. ( See, e.g. https://www.cityofflorenceco.gov/police-officer-school-resource-officer#:~:text=Job%20duties%20will%20include%20public,EOE and https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/northglenn/jobs/4255814/police-officer-school-resource-officer-sro?page=2&pagetype=jobOpportunitiesJobs.

• Therefore, students and families may pursue damages for violations of constitutional rights by school resource officers (SROs) or other law enforcement personnel in schools, without the traditional federal barrier of qualified immunity. 

• The Act requires a political subdivision of the state to indemnify its employees for a claim of a civil rights violation; except that if the peace officer's employer determines the officer did not act upon a good faith and reasonable belief that the action was lawful, then the peace officer is personally liable for 5 percent of the judgment or $25,000, whichever is less. If the judgment is uncollectible from the officer, then the officer's employer satisfies the whole judgment. A public entity does not have to indemnify a peace officer if the peace officer was convicted of a criminal violation for the conduct from which the claim arises. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb20-217#:~:text=The%20act%20requires%20a,which%20the%20claim%20arises. 

Anti-discrimination protections under state human rights statutes

• As discussed above, CADA is the state’s primary anti-discrimination law. The Colorado Civil Rights Division (CCRD) enforces CADA. 

• Traditionally, the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (CGIA) generally shielded public entities and employees from civil liability in tort actions, establishing a general immunity from liability unless a specific exception outlined in the CGIA applies. (See Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-10-106 https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-24/article-10/section-24-10-106/and https://osc.colorado.gov/sorm/liability-claims/cgia-summary. )

•  However, the Colorado Supreme Court has clarified that claims under CADA are not barred by the CGIA, as they arise from statutory duties to eliminate discrimination rather than from tort law.

Private right of action provisions under state civil rights and human rights statutes

• CADA allows individuals to bring a private right of action in district court under certain conditions. CADA allows claimants to address claims of discrimination via both administrative proceedings adjudicated by the CCRD and judicial adjudication in district court. However CADA prohibits filing a civil action in district court without first exhausting the administrative process, unless the plaintiff can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that pursuing administrative remedies would cause irreparable harm due to ill health or other exigent circumstances. Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-34-306(14). 

•  The steps for exhausting administrative remedies are set forth in C.R.S.A. § 24-34-306(1)-(10) and, in general, involve a complainant first filing a charge alleging discriminatory or unfair practice with the CCRD, which investigates the allegations and determines whether probable cause exists. If the CCRD finds no probable cause, the complainant may file a civil action in district court within 90 days of receiving notice of the dismissal. However, Section 24-34-306(11) also outlines three “circumstances that have the effect of exhaustion” and permit claimant to proceed to adjudication before a district court. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc. v. Scardina,  556 P.3d 1238, 1249, 2024 CO 67, ¶ 43 (Colo., 2024). These are:

• where the CCRD has not served written notice within 450 days of the charge being filed that a formal hearing will be held; 

• the complainant has requested and received a "right-to-sue" letter.

• a hearing has not been commenced within the one-hundred-twenty day period after written notice and complaint is served requiring the respondent to answer the charges at a formal hearing before the CCRD. (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-34-306(11).)

In these cases, the jurisdiction of the CCRD ceases and the complainant is authorized to proceed by filing a civil action in the district court for the district in which the alleged discriminatory or unfair practice occurred within 90 days after the date upon which the jurisdiction of the commission ceased. (Id. and Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-34-306(2)(b)(I)(B).) 

Identify whether state anti-discrimination laws also prohibit discrimination caused by disparate impact. If yes, does the state law allow a private right of action for disparate impact claims? 

• While the statutory text does not explicitly use the term "disparate impact," CADA (particularly in the employment context) aligns with federal anti-discrimination laws, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which recognizes disparate impact claims. Section 24-34-405(6) of CADA (known as the “Job Protection and Civil Rights Enforcement Act of 2013”) explicitly states that that Section "shall be construed, interpreted, and applied in a manner that is consistent with standards established through judicial interpretation of Title VII.” This alignment suggests that CADA encompasses claims of disparate impact discrimination, as Title VII does. Further, individuals can bring complaints alleging disparate impact discrimination to be heard by the CCRD.

• Although CADA prohibits disparate impact discrimination, it does not expressly provide a private right of action for claims based on disparate impact. Further, with respect to civil actions for employment discrimination, Section 24-34-405(3)(a) states that "the court shall not award a plaintiff compensatory or punitive damages when the defendant is found to have engaged in an employment practice that is unlawful solely because of its disparate impact." This provision limits the remedies available for disparate impact claims, effectively precluding plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination from pursuing such claims in court for monetary damages. However, claimants may still attempt to bring disparate impact claims under CADA through administrative process outlined in C.R.S.A. § 24-34-306 (see Private Right of Action section above). 

Is the right provided by state law conferred on the student, parent/guardian, or both? In other words, who can bring a claim under this law? 

• Under CADA’s prohibition on discrimination in places of public accommodation, which includes schools, “a person aggrieved by the violation of section 24-34-601” may bring an action in a court in the county where the violation occurred. (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-34-601) While CADA does not expressly specify whether the child or a parent/guardian must bring a claim under the law, general principals regarding the mental capacity of minors permit parents to bring a claim on behalf of their minor child. 

Does the specified law or policy provide protections against retaliation? What are the elements of a retaliation claim? Are protections against retaliation clearly spelled out in the law or policy?

• CADA prohibits retaliation against individuals who oppose discriminatory practices, file complaints, or participate in investigations or proceedings under CADA. (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-34-601(2.5))

• In Akinbode v. Department of Corrections, Denver Reception & Diagnostic Center, 2021 WL 12347079, at *4 (Colo.App., 2021), the Colorado Court of Appeals states that to establish a prima facie case of retaliation under CADA, a complainant must either provide direct evidence of retaliation or show that: 

• (1) she engaged in “protected opposition” (e.g., reporting discrimination) to prohibited discrimination; 

• (2) she suffered an “adverse action by the employer”; and 

• (3) a causal connection existed between the protected conduct and the adverse employment action. (While the court here cited to Smith v. Bd. of Educ., 83 P.3d 1157, 1162 (Colo. App. 2003) and Fye v. Okla. Corp Comm'n, 516 F.3d 1217, 1227 (10th Cir. 2008)), which concerned retaliation claims under Title VII, the applicable language in CADA is substantially similar to Title VII language that prohibits retaliation and the court relies on federal law when it is helpful in construing Colorado law.)

Statute of limitations for filing education-related state civil rights complaints (or state civil rights complaints broadly) or state human rights complaints?

• Filing a Charge (Administrative Complaint) with the CCRD:

• The statute of limitations for filing discrimination complaints under CADA with the CCRD differ depending on the context, and are as follows: 

• Employment filing deadline: 300-day from notice of the act of alleged discrimination

• Housing filing deadline: one (1) year from the act of alleged discrimination

• Public Accommodations filing deadline: sixty (60) days from the alleged discriminatory act. (https://ccrd.colorado.gov/the-complaint-process)

A “place of public accommodation” is defined under the statute to mean “any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public, including but not limited to … an educational institution.” Therefore, the statute of limitations for a K-12 student or their parents filing education-related discrimination complaints is 60 days from the date the alleged discriminatory act occurred.

• Filing a Claim in Civil Court after Administrative Exhaustion:

• After a complainant has exhausted administrative remedies or falls under one of the three circumstances outlined in C.R.S.A. 24-34-306(11), they will have ninety (90) days to file a civil action in the district court for the district in which the alleged discriminatory or unfair practice occurred.

Are there areas where the state laws provide more protections than federal law? What are those areas? 

Generally: CADA explicitly includes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes, providing clear protections that may not be as explicitly covered under federal law. 

The “Kelly Loving Act” (HB25-1312) – Enhanced Protections for Transgender Individuals: The Kelly Loving Act (signed into law on May 16, 2025) amends CADA to enhance protections for transgender individuals, including the right to use preferred names and pronouns and access facilities aligning with their gender identity.(https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1312.) 

• Section 6 of the Kelly Loving Act provides that, if a local education provide enacts or enforces a policy related to names, that policy must be inclusive of all reasons that a student might adopt a name that differs from the student's legal name.

• Section 7 requires that a dress code adopted by a school district board of education or by an institute charter school board must allow each student to choose from any of the options provided in the dress code policy.

• Section 8 defines the term "chosen name" for purposes of the CADA as “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.” Section 8 also adds "chosen name and how the individual chooses to be expressed" as forms of gender expression for purposes of CADA. (https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2025a_1312_signed.pdf.)

Senate Bill 23-296 (SB23-296): Prevent Harassment And Discrimination In Schools

• SB23-296, signed into law on June 6, 2023, aims to ensure that students who are subject to harassment or discrimination are provided a prompt and fair process for reporting harassment or discrimination, information about their rights and status of the complaint, and supportive measures or accommodations to remedy the impact of the harassment or discrimination. An investigation under this statute is handled by the local school or district - not a state agency. (https://www.cde.state.co.us/dropoutprevention/sb23-296concerningprotectionsforstudentsagainstdiscrimination). 

  • It requires public schools that enroll student in grades Kindergarten through 12 to, among other things: accept formal reports of harassment or discrimination in writing or in person; post notices describing how a student can report harassment or discrimination; adopt procedures for investigating reports of harassment or discrimination. 

  • SB23-296 requires schools to report information about the harassment and discrimination reports it receives to the school district once per year, and requires the school district to report the information it receives from each school to the Colorado Department of Education once per year. The act also exempts excused absences related to harassment or discrimination (for example, for therapy, medical, legal, or victim services appointment) from the existing school attendance requirement.(https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb23-296.)

House Bill 24-1039 (HB24-1039): Non-Legal Name Changes

• Signed into law in April 2024, HB24-103a9 mandates that school personnel address students by their chosen names in all school and extracurricular settings. The law defines a “chosen name” as any name a student requests to be known by, reflecting their gender identity. Knowingly or intentionally refusing to use a student’s chosen name is deemed discriminatory. (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1039.) Schools must implement a written policy to honor such requests. Schools are required to use the preferred name in the classroom and on items like rosters, the yearbook and the student’s ID. Refusal to do so is deemed a form of discrimination, and the act allows a student who is subject to discrimination as a result of failure to address the student by their chosen name to file a complaint under Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) Section 22-1-143 (2) or file a complaint under the public school's policy adopted pursuant to Title IX of the Federal Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. secs. 1681 et seq).(https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2024a_1039_signed.pdf.)