A Denver judge is considering whether prison labor in Colorado constitutes involuntary servitude during a nine-day civil trial that began Tuesday.
The case stems from a 2022 lawsuit in which state prisoners claimed the Colorado Department of Corrections’ approach to prison labor is coercive, illegal and ultimately amounts to involuntary servitude, which Colorado voters outlawed via Amendment A in 2018.
Prisoners in Colorado are expected to work prison jobs, which include food preparation, janitorial services and other positions within prisons. They can choose not to work, but doing so is a disciplinary infraction for which prisoners are punished, according to court filings.
At issue in the civil case is whether punishments for prisoners who refuse to work are so coercive that they actually force prisoners to work against their will.
“Cuffing someone up and taking them to ‘the hole’ in front of other people sends a clear message: ‘You better work or this can happen to you,'” attorney Stephanie Frisinger said during opening statements Tuesday, referring to prisoners being placed in more restrictive housing.
Attorneys for the Department of Corrections argue the work, for which far below minimum wage, is voluntary. Prisoners face consequences for choosing not to work, but those consequences do not rise to the level of coercion — threats of physical harm, restraint or coercion through the legal process — required for involuntary servitude, said Jennifer Hunt, attorney for the state, during opening statements.
“To create the condition of involuntary servitude, it is not enough that those possible consequences are uncomfortable,” Hunt said. “…We don’t have chain gangs in Colorado.”
The prisoners are asking Denver District Court Judge Sarah Wallace to rule that prison work requirements are unconstitutional involuntary servitude and to block the practice going forward. The lawsuit is brought by , a nonprofit law firm headed by David Seligman, a candidate in the 2026 race for Colorado attorney general.
“One of the things the trial will show is there are all kinds of ways people who are incarcerated in Colorado are coerced by the state to work in violation of Amendment A, in ways that make Colorado an outlier even relative to other states,” Seligman said Monday.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser declined to comment through a spokesman, citing the ongoing litigation.
The fear of punishment pushes inmates to go to work even when they are sick, said Demetrius Somerville, a former prisoner and co-manager of End Slavery Colorado.
Harold Mortis, who is serving a 40-year prison sentence, alleged in the 2022 complaint that when he refused to work in a prison kitchen during the COVID-19 pandemic out of fear he would get sick, prison officials docked him two days of — which pushed out his parole eligibility date, the lawsuit alleges.
Prisoners who refuse to work are also punished with more restrictive housing and other types of discipline, the lawsuit alleges.
“I was afraid to take a sick day,” Sarah Beaudoin, who spent more than 18 years in prison, said during a news conference Tuesday. “I think I worked every single day in prison. …Itap not an option not to go to that job — if you don’t go, you get reprimanded. That’s not fair.”
Mortis eventually returned to work in the prison “involuntarily” because of the potential punishments, the lawsuit claimed.
Attorneys for the Colorado Department of Corrections argue that the very fact that prisoners can choose not to work shows that the jobs are not involuntary servitude.
“Prisoners may face a limited set of consequences for refusal to participate in work or other programming, including loss of privileges or loss of good time,” state attorney Ann Stanton wrote in a trial brief. “These consequences do not constitute physical coercion, physical injury or legal coercion amounting to involuntary servitude in violation of the Colorado Constitution.”
Frisinger argued in court filings that the punishments do rise to the level of legal coercion, and cited examples of prisoners who were restrained or handcuffed solely because they refused to work.
“Labor under the threat or fear of physical restraint, including the use of handcuffs and shackles in response to failure to work, is coercive,” she wrote. “…Labor done under the threat or fear of increased physical confinement within prison, including being sent to ‘the hole,’ …is coercive physical restraint.”
