Voters will decide in the Nov. 3 election whether to require Colorado law enforcement to alert federal immigration authorities after certain crimes are charged against someone who may not have proper legal status in the United States.
would override some of Colorado’s statutory limitations on local police working with federal authorities on civil immigration enforcement, though it would not completely upend those so-called “sanctuary laws.” It is one of several ballot measures backed this fall by the conservative group Advance Colorado, a dark-money organization that doesn’t disclose its backers but is funded by prominent Republican megadonors, including billionaire Philip Anschutz.
The state constitutional amendment requires at least 55% support from voters to pass.
What would Amendment 81 do if passed?
The measure would apply to people who are either charged with a crime of violence or who have previously been convicted of any felony and are now charged with any type of crime, including traffic violations.
Law enforcement would be required to make a “reasonable effort” to figure out if that person is in the U.S. legally and then — if the person does not have proper legal status — notify ICE about them within 72 hours of filing charges. Local law enforcement would also be required to notify ICE if they haven’t been able to determine if the defendant is in the U.S. legally.
The measure requires only that a confirmed or suspected immigrant without proper legal status who is subject to the new policy be charged with a crime of violence, not convicted of one. , “crimes of violence” include any crime against at-risk children or adults, murder, first- or second-degree assault, kidnapping, first-degree arson, escape, criminal extortion and other charges.
For those who were convicted of a prior felony, any subsequent charge — including traffic offenses or petty crimes — would be enough to require law enforcement to alert ICE about them.
Colorado law currently prohibits state or local law enforcement or employees from working with ICE on any civil immigration enforcement operation, except as part of a criminal investigation. Sheriffs and jails cannot hold people to comply with an ICE detainer request, though they can alert ICE if someone without legal status is about to be released. They can also allow ICE agents to enter secure areas of jails to make arrests.
How much would it cost?
says Amendment 81 would increase costs and workload for law enforcement agencies, with most of the workload increase falling on district attorneys’ offices. It does not estimate an overall fiscal impact, but state analysts estimate about $60,000 in costs for the Colorado Department of Revenue and the Department of Natural Resources to access federal databases, make programming changes or update computer systems.
What do supporters say?
According to , supporters of Amendment 81 argue that people charged with violent crimes, or charged with new crimes after a prior conviction, should be reported to federal authorities for immigration enforcement. They argue the measure targets suspected or convicted criminals without ensnaring other immigrants.
The measure would boost communication between federal and state authorities on public safety matters, they say, while creating a statewide, standardized approach to working with ICE.
What do opponents say?
Critics of Amendment 81, including several liberal-leaning groups such as the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition, argue that the measure would undermine due process rights because people would be reported to ICE before they’d been found guilty of any new charges, according to the Blue Book. As a result, people who’ve committed no crimes may be swept up in ICE arrest and deportation efforts.
Opponents also argue that the proposal is too broad for consistent and fair enforcement; parts of the measure are undefined, including what it means to make a “reasonable effort” to determine someone’s legal status, which may leave parts of the proposal open to the interpretation of individual agencies and officers.
