By early Wednesday evening, when Denver had finished counting the bulk of its ballots, Kiros — who was not alive when DeGette, 68, was elected to her first of 15 terms — led the congresswoman by more than 13 percentage points.

The 29-year-old lawyer marshalled grassroots support and an array of favorable forces to dislodge a fixture of Denver’s political scene — and upend the shadow primary that had quietly awaited DeGette’s retirement, with aspiring successors biding their time. Kiros’ campaign, working with the Denver chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, out-organized DeGette repeatedly, nearly keeping her off the ballot in the spring and then overcoming DeGette’s hefty financial advantage in the campaign’s final weeks.

The campaign harnessed — or at least rode — the discontent that Democratic voters have expressed for their longtime party officials, including with her full-throated support of the Palestinian people over Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip. The congressional district’s Democratic electorate, dominated by Denverites, turned out in numbers that eclipsed nearly every prior primary race in DeGette’s career.

“Melat ran a compelling campaign with a vision about what America can be and should be, rather than being this politician that constantly tells voters no,” said Deep Singh Badhesha, a Denver DSA member who worked with Kiros’ campaign. “… It����ap something you’re seeing all across the nation. It����ap that do-nothing Democrats aren’t good enough anymore.”

Meanwhile, DeGette, who had batted away the occasional primary challenger over the years, appeared flat-footed.

She highlighted her progressive bona fides and her experience. But her pitch — that she was a proven progressive who’d managed one of President Donald Trump’s impeachments and would have seniority should the Democrats retake Congress this fall — failed to counteract the wave that Kiros had caught.

“DeGette is liberal, and particularly had done a lot of work on reproductive rights,” said Paul Teske, a professor at the University of Colorado Denver’s School of Public Affairs who had Kiros as a student in one of his classes. “I wouldn’t paint her too far in the center, though Melat was certainly to the left. But the enthusiasm gap, the age gap and the willingness to fight Trump (put Kiros over).”

In a video DeGette released around noon Wednesday to concede the race, she congratulated Kiros for her win. She said she would make the most of her final six months in office.

“Frankly, this was not the way I would have wanted to end my career in politics, but I’m proud of my accomplishments,” she said. “… I strive every day to be the quintessential legislator, passing bills of my own design and collaborating with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make a better society for all Americans.

“Sadly, in our toxic political climate, there seems to be little room for that type of politician anymore.”

Decisive defeat amid high turnout

When DeGette trailed at the first ballot drop Tuesday evening, her defeat appeared certain. By Wednesday, the win had turned into a rout.

“In the cold light of morning, 10 points — that almost feels like there aren’t many tactical or strategic decisions the campaign could have made that would have changed the outcome,” Ian Silverii, a political consultant whose firm briefly worked for DeGette in the spring, said on a livestream of his podcast Wednesday morning. The margin later grew more.

The victory propels Kiros to the November election in solid-blue Denver against a Republican nominee, Christy Peterson, who’s little known and hasn’t reported fundraising.

Kiros, who is also a member of the Denver DSA chapter, rode the same waves that propelled similar candidates elsewhere. A week before her victory, three New York City congressional candidates endorsed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani won their primaries.

Kiros received the Denver DSA endorsement earlier this year, and her campaign and the organization later became “totally bound up” in each other, said Susie Ramsey, the co-chair of Denver DSA and a Kiros campaign staffer. The Denver group modeled its approach for Kiros — training field leads who could run their own canvassing efforts in specific parts of the district — after Mamdani’s approach in New York.

But at the time, the DSA’s electoral muscle in the state had atrophied, she said. The Denver DSA has endorsed some Denver City Council candidates, with a handful winning in recent elections, but most of its council slate lost in 2023.

Ramsey said that, initially, she thought Kiros’ campaign was a long shot but, if nothing else, it could help build left-wing power in the city.

Who is Melat Kiros? What to know about the 29-year-old democratic socialist who ousted U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette.

Then Kiros and DSA organizers nearly kept DeGette off of the ballot at the party’s nominating assemblies in March, where the incumbent barely cleared the 30% viability threshold of support among party delegates. The process was a proving ground for DSA’s newfound organizing, and its success helped rally members and convince them — and Kiros — that they could topple DeGette.

Crucially, it also earned the campaign invaluable media attention.

“It built our muscle,” Ramsey said.

By the end of the campaign, the Denver DSA’s membership had grown from around 1,350 to nearly 1,800 members, Ramsey said. Kiros’ campaign had 1,800 volunteers — half of whom, Ramsey estimated, were DSA members.

The DSA-backed success in New York, Ramsey said, “is showing us what the horizon is, and Denver is showing you how we can compress the timeline.”

In a memo distributed Wednesday, the Colorado Polling Institute pointed to an August survey that found that more than half of Denver Democratic voters had a favorable view of socialism. Among voters under the age of 35, 65% had a favorable view of socialism, compared to 35% who were supportive of capitalism.

Annie Orloff, a spokeswoman for Kiros’ campaign, also attributed some of the campaign’s success to its association with the DSA.

“Socialism is very popular here. Or at least a little more popular than capitalism,” Orloff said. “I think (Denver DSA) will keep growing. You could see at the watch party — at all of our canvasses — that people are so hungry to be a part of a community that is fun, that is also fighting for working people.”

'A rejection of the old guard'

But Kyle Saunders, a political science professor at Colorado State University, disagreed.

“Kiros’ victory reads as more a rejection of the old guard than a conversion to socialism,” he wrote in . “Downtown Denver is young, educated, full of renters and mostly socialist-adjacent at best. Many of those voters are tired of the establishment, and the DSA was the only outfit organized enough to give that feeling a home.”

How amenable Denver voters are to the values of democratic socialism may be less relevant than how much work Kiros' campaign put into organizing, however. Volunteers knocked on 115,000 doors and made more than half a million phone calls, Ramsey said.

“To overcome the millions of dollars in dark money, we were able to have real conversations with folks across the city, and I think that made a real difference,” Orloff said.

DeGette’s campaign spent $1.2 million, while outside supporters dropped more than $2.3 million in the past month to bolster the congresswoman’s chances. Much of that support came from Pro-Choice Majority Action, which had been funded in part by groups supporting Israel.

Those ads, some of which attacked Kiros for “recently moving to Denver,” appeared to turn some voters away from DeGette, Orloff said. A child of immigrants, Kiros was born in Ethiopia but moved to Denver with her family as a baby.

“It����ap anecdotal, but we had people show up to canvas after seeing some of those ads,” she said.

Kiros shocked Colorado’s political world when she secured her place on the ballot by winning the county assembly earlier this year. Then, a few couple weeks later, DeGette only narrowly landed on the ballot herself.

“She also fell asleep. (DeGette) did not take this as seriously as she should have,” said Jason Bane, who operates the Democratic political website ColoradoPols.com. “The combination of anger about Trump and anger about older elected officials — and DeGette’s general absence in the district — made this a perfect opportunity for someone like Kiros.”

Ramsey said that by the time DeGette started taking the race seriously, “it was too late for her.” Her campaign and the DSA had already shifted gears from the assembly process to the full campaign.

“We almost pushed her off the ballot, you would think that would wake her up,” Ramsey said.

DeGette spoke only through her video and statement Wednesday. A campaign spokesman said the congresswoman wasn’t available for an interview.

Teske, the CU Denver professor, said it����ap hard for candidates like DeGette to make their case to voters when they’re in the minority party in the House.

“I imagine when you've been elected 15 times over 30 years, you get a little complacent maybe,” Teske said, noting that DeGette has fended off challengers from the left before.

Of his former student, he recalls telling Kiros how difficult it would be to unseat DeGette. Ultimately, he said Kiros won with a “smart, politically savvy” campaign that tapped into a national political atmosphere.

Staff writer Nick Coltrain contributed to this story.

U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper wants Colorado voters to give him another six years in office to continue this fight. His opponent in the June primary — Colorado state Sen. Julie Gonzales — says she is sick of “do-nothing Democrats” who haven’t advanced the progressive agenda or blocked the worst of Trump’s impulses.

The question before voters is whether John Hickenlooper is the best man for the job or is Colorado in need of the change Julie Gonzales promises as the state’s first woman in Senate. While The Denver Post Editorial Board is not formally endorsing in this race, we interviewed both candidates as a service to readers trying to decide which Democrat to advance to November. Here is what they told us about their approach to the office.

“I want to make sure we win; we beat the Republicans and take control of the House and the Senate, and that means 100% focused on those elections and fighting Trump at every single step we can,” Hickenlooper said, saying that Trump is eligible for impeachment and removal from the White House, but it’ll never happen. “(We are) beginning to work on a lot of the stuff he has destroyed. When we build it back, and we will build it back, we’ve got to build it back better than it was before.”

Hickenlooper said building back better will take statesmanship — getting senators on board with changes to healthcare, taxes and other reforms. Our current senator has worked hard to build relationships in the Senate that he says have been crucial for getting legislation passed, like the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act.

When asked what she’d do differently than Hickenlooper, Gonzales was clear that Hickenlooper and other incumbents have been sitting on the sidelines rather than using procedural processes to block this administration’s destructive agenda.

“It’s become too easy right now to just retreat to our corners and say nothing and then, you know, throw stones at the other side come election time,” Gonzales said, noting that shutting down the federal government over abuses of power was absolutely the right call in 2025. “I actually spoke to furloughed workers during the most recent shutdown when (Sen. Minority Leader Chuck) Schumer caved. They were livid because their perspective was, ‘I’m sorry, we were just starting to get somewhere. Why are we going to fold right now so that we can go on … Thanksgiving?'”

The contrast between their approaches is clear — Hickenlooper has built relationships and trust, including with key moderate Republicans, that he says will benefit Coloradans in the next 6 years. Gonzales wants to use power and pressure to first prevent the worst from the remaining two years of Trump’s administration and then to quickly bring about lasting reform.

Hickenlooper is a moderate candidate who wants to make changes within the system, while Gonzales is a progressive candidate who wants drastic overhauls of systems.

For example, Gonzales wants to abolish the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement. She says we need to implement a wealth tax on billionaires.

Hickenlooper said he’d support a graduated wealth tax on those making more than $1 million in taxable income a year, but said a smarter approach is to get Republicans on board with eliminating tax breaks for wealthy individuals and corporations.

Gonzales wants Medicare for all — a single-payer system that mimics European models of health care. She would abolish private health insurance.

Hickenlooper supports what he calls “radical transparency” legislation that would force health insurance companies to disclose exactly what they are spending, where for health care.

“Once an employer signs a contract with a United Healthcare or a Cigna, everything goes opaque. They can’t see what any hospital is paying. The American Medical Association says that the health care spending right now is about $5.3 trillion and that about a quarter of it is waste, duplication, inefficiency and some fraud,” Hickenlooper said. “We could capture that with this transparency bill.”

Gonzales has made no secret of her criticism of Hickenlooper’s current financial entanglements. She wanted us to ask Hickenlooper about a recent financial filing that disclosed Hickenlooper, who sits on an important transportation committee, had recently purchased about $150,000 in Uber stocks.

Hickenlooper, who has been in the Senate for six years now, told us that he and his wife have decided to move their money into a qualified blind trust.

We love it when and a healthy primary goad an incumbent politician into doing the right thing.

Here’s the complex backstory and why it����ap important.

As the mayor of Denver – way back in 2007 — Hickenlooper famously sold his interest in a large restaurant group where he had made his fortune to avoid conflicts of interest.

“I put everything I owned into a blind trust, and it����ap been in that same blind trust all that time. I’ve never asked or been told what has been bought or what has been sold,” said Hickenlooper, who signed onto a bill to ban congressional stock trades.

But the Select Committee on Ethics recommends that senators with substantial investments use a “qualified blind trust,” a stricter designation that only a handful of senators have attained for their investments. Hickenlooper said he will have to sell stocks, pay capital gains taxes and move his money to a new management company.

“I’m ready to do that because you have got to have public trust. And it����ap frustrating because you’ve done everything right, and now they raise the bar,” he said.

Every U.S. senator – 100 men and women entrusted by voters with immense global power — should follow Hickenlooper’s lead and put their money in qualified blind trusts or stop investing in the stock market altogether.

Gonzales said if she were put in office, she would fight to ban members of Congress from making any stock trades personally, and Hickenlooper said he also supports a ban.

Corruption in Washington, D.C., is a serious issue, and we are glad that both candidates in this race are willing to step up and fight against the abuse of power.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Hundreds of Democratic elected officials, volunteers and voters have asked the state party to formally censure Polis, alleging that his commutation decision is “incompatible” with the party’s values. , which was released Monday, asks party officials to condemn Polis’ decision to have Peters released on June 1 and find that it amounts to “conduct detrimental to the interests of the Colorado Democratic Party.”

Besides a censure, the complaint asks that the party limit Polis’ appearances at state party events like early June’s DemFest, including not allowing him to speak at or attend them.

The committee could then vote on whether to reprimand Polis or take other actions sought in the complaint.

“Given the urgency of the issue and the remedies being sought, (Murib) believes the most productive path forward is for the (central committee) to consider the matter directly,” Nicla wrote. Murib was among the Democrats who criticized Polis’ decision after it was announced on Friday.

The potential rebuke is the latest in a wave of scathing criticism from Democrats against Polis after he announced that he was reducing Peters’ original sentence of nearly nine years by roughly half for convictions related to an election data-breach scheme. The former Mesa County clerk and ally of President Donald Trump will end up serving about 20 months in jail and prison, with her release now coming roughly 30 months earlier than her prior parole eligibility date.

“The Colorado Democratic Party has consistently defended election workers, election administration, and public confidence in democratic processes,” the complaint’s authors wrote. “Granting clemency to one of the nation’s most prominent election denial figures directly undermines those efforts and weakens the Party’s credibility on issues of democracy and election integrity.”

In a statement Tuesday, Polis spokesman Eric Maruyama said Polis understood that other Democrats disagreed and were disappointed, but the governor “made the decision he felt was right, not popular.”

Ian Coggins, an official with the Denver Democrats, drafted the complaint letter over the weekend. Of the hundreds of people he sent the letter to, none has said they felt it was inappropriate, he said in an interview.

Coggins said the commutation was “icing on the cake” after a series of recent rifts between Polis and the broader party. That has included the governor’s efforts to comply with an immigration subpoena and his veto of a pro-union measure last year.

Coggins said the official party complaint seemed to be the strongest venue available to condemn Polis’ actions, especially since a special legislative session — with the goal of a censure by the General Assembly — seemed out of reach.

“(Polis) is the highest elected state official of the party in the state,” Coggins said, likening the situation to when people demanded the GOP condemn Trump if he didn’t represent that party’s values. “… We have to do the same thing, too, and say as a party, ‘This does not represent us.’ ”

Nearly 600 people have signed complaint

The complaint had attracted nearly 600 signatories by Tuesday afternoon, though that total included unaffiliated voters.

A dozen Democratic lawmakers had signed on, as had a number of candidates and local officials. They included elected leaders from Denver, Thornton, Superior, Westminster, Edgewater, Adams County, Lakewood and elsewhere.

State Sen. Lisa Cutter, a Jefferson County Democrat and early signatory to the complaint, said Peters’ commutation sent “a really bad message, at a really bad time.”

Democrats, aside from Polis, lined up early to oppose any kind of clemency for Peters, including in a letter signed by every Democrat in the legislature in March. The former clerk had become the face of election conspiracies and attempts to undermine voting systems, Cutter said. Cutter also noted that the judicial process still had not finished playing out for Peters.

She said that “every single Dem I’ve spoken to is mad about this.”

“There are certain things where (Polis) feels like he needs to override the will of the legislature, override the will of the party, override the judge that sentenced her,” Cutter said, while stressing that she didn’t personally dislike Polis and praising good things he’d done. “There’s a lot of hubris that is shocking.”

In the governor’s office statement Tuesday, Maruyama said Polis agreed with a recent Colorado Court of Appeals decision that found Peters’ speech had influenced the length of her initial sentence.

“One of the great things about the Democratic Party is that we are a big tent, and there is space to debate and disagree. No clemency decision should be granted only on whether it will be popular,” Maruyama wrote.

Still, by cutting out the judicial branch and waiting until after the legislature had adjourned its session, Polis was “just ignoring” the other two coequal branches of government, said Sen. Chris Kolker, a Centennial Democrat and another signatory.

“This was a pointed message to a lame duck governor, saying we don’t agree with this,” Kolker said.

The complaint, which was first reported by , came days after Polis announced that he was commuting Peters’ sentence and that she would be released on parole early next month.

Peters’ attorneys plan further appeal

The former clerk has become a cause célèbre among right-wing Trump allies and election conspiracists, and the president had repeatedly pressured Polis to release her, including by taking actions against Colorado.

The two men also spoke about her sentence during a phone call last year, .

Peters still plans to appeal the underlying convictions, her attorney Peter Ticktin said in an interview Tuesday. The deadline for her to file an appeal to the state Supreme Court is later this week.

Though Peters released a statement last week saying she was sorry, Ticktin said she wasn’t contrite.

“I don’t think that she was showing contrition for what happened,” Ticktin said. “I think she realizes that it was a mistake and things could’ve been handled in a better way.”

Peters may also be eligible for payment from the Trump administration, Vice President JD Vance suggested Tuesday.

He indicated that Peters should receive “some compensation” from that seeks to provide settlements for people who suffered what the department described as “weaponization and lawfare.”

“Tina Peters is a person who’s about to get out of prison, thanks in large part to the president’s good work in Colorado,” . “This is a woman who, at worst … committed misdemeanor trespassing, and someone threw the book at her.”

Peters, who as clerk sought to give an outside party access to secure voting equipment, was convicted of multiple felonies, including three counts of attempting to influence a public servant. A jury also found her guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failing to comply with the secretary of state.

Peters’ case was brought by state prosecutors, not by the Biden administration, which pursued prosecutions against people involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol following Trump’s 2020 election loss.

Asked about Peters’ eligibility for a settlement, the White House referred comment to the Justice Department. Representatives for DOJ did not return messages seeking comment Tuesday.

Ticktin said he still needed to examine whether Peters was eligible for the settlement, as she wasn’t prosecuted by the Biden administration but rather, in his characterization, by a “globalist judge” in a “captured state.”

Polis had mulled pardoning Peters for months before the appellate decision came down. Starting last fall, other elected officials in the state came to believe that he would soon take action on her sentence, and the governor later repeatedly mused that her sentence was too harsh.

As required by law, his office consulted in January with the judge who sentenced Peters. In March, to assuage angry lawmakers, the governor’s office privately said he would wait out the appeals court before making a decision on Peters’ sentence.

Ultimately, that decision came two days after the legislature adjourned for the year, effectively neutering Democratic lawmakers’ ability to formally respond to him — as they had privately discussed doing earlier in the year.

Two Democratic candidates in the spring primaries, congressional hopeful Melat Kiros and attorney general candidate David Seligman, have since called on the legislature to reconvene to take action against Polis. The day after Polis’ announcement, someone also launched a website calling for his impeachment and directing people to call lawmakers.

But a special session is not likely, given the hurdle.

Short of a governor’s call, the legislature can gather for a special session only if two-thirds of both the House and Senate support it. Reaching that threshold would require every Democrat in the Capitol to get on board, plus at least one Republican in each chamber.

Senate President James Coleman and House Speaker Julie McCluskie both declined to comment on the party complaint Tuesday. They earlier issued a statement opposing Polis’ commutation.

Still, lawmakers have made no secret of their displeasure with Polis, with many signing on to the complaint or releasing statements criticizing the governor last week. Some, like progressive Democratic Reps. Javier Mabrey and Jenny Willford, said Tuesday they wouldn’t attend bill-signing ceremonies with the governor in the coming weeks.

“The overwhelming public outcry we’ve seen is a testament to how poorly the governor has handled this,” Rep. Steven Woodrow, a Denver Democrat who signed the complaint, said in a text message. For his part, he said he would attend bill-signings with the governor.

“When our republic came under assault from a corrupt administration, he quickly folded,” Woodrow said. “People are justifiably outraged.”

Tell us what you think about this story

Re: “Attack on Pope Leo, posting of Jesus image criticized,” April 14 news story

When in the course of human events, could someone have ever foreseen the time when the president of the United States would have to explain why he posted and unposted a picture of himself as Jesus? Will there be additional low points of this presidency before Congress realizes it is time to face the reality of the president����ap mind and protect what����ap left of the reputation of the office?

Cindy Robertson, Denver

Just when you think President Trump can’t get any crazier, he does (e.g., attacking Iran, insulting the pope, etc.). What will be the crisis du jour tomorrow? I think it����ap time for Congress to begin 25th Amendment proceedings. Please. Before it����ap too late.

Flint Whitlock, Denver

Let’s understand the impeachment clause

Re: “,” April 9 commentary

Kirsten Matoy Carlson is mistaken about the consequences of a guilty verdict by the U.S. Senate after an impeachment trial. She states, “If the person is convicted and removed from office, only then can senators vote on whether to permanently disqualify that person from ever again holding federal office.”

That is not what the Constitution says! states: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States…” There is only one vote.

Nowhere in the Constitution with regard to impeachment is there any reference or mandate that after conviction, senators “may” or “can” vote to bar the convicted person from holding federal office in the future. Legal scholars hinge that false opinion on their false understanding of grammar. The word “and” is a conjunction. It joins independent clauses, indicating a connection between the two, especially between items of the same type or class. Removal from office and barring from holding any other office are of the same class and type! In essence, the Senate is saying, “You violated your oath of office and the public trust, therefore you are removed from office and cannot be trusted in any federal office in the future.”

Tom Hubbard, Denver

Tax return takes nonsensical route to Ogden, Utah via USPS

I sent my tax return to the IRS in Ogden, Utah, via certified mail on March 13. It took a vacation and flew to Sarasota, Fla., then to Tampa, then back to Sarasota before making a leisurely trip to its original destination. It arrived there on March 27.

Using flying distance, an approximate 400-mile trip became a 3,550-mile journey.

Conspiracy theorists want to know whether the USPS has been tasked with delaying our refunds as long as possible. Or are they just practicing for what they plan to do with our ballots for the midterms?

Dee Nelson, Centennial

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Hickenlooper said he hoped Republicans would agree to the reforms, which include prohibiting federal agents from wearing masks or making arrests without warrants, as part of a potential deal to avert a partial government shutdown. The proposals match what other in the wake of the Saturday killing of observer Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by .

Pretti’s death prompted Democrats to pull back support for the package of funding bills set for a vote this week ahead of a Friday deadline, but Republicans embracing the reforms could help win sufficient Democratic backing to clear procedural hurdles.

“In the absence of (real reform), the Senate must reject this appropriations bill,” Bennet said during a media call with Hickenlooper and the state’s four Democratic House members. Both senators had already said they wouldn’t vote for more funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which includes Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The lawmakers were all critical of ICE, which has been aided in Minneapolis by other agencies. U.S. Rep. Brittany Pettersen, who said Pretti’s parents — Arvada residents — were her constituents, called for the resignation or impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette of Denver called ICE a “rogue agency” that should be dismantled. (None of the lawmakers called for the abolition of ICE.)

Hickenlooper was optimistic that 15 to 20 Republican senators would support an amendment that included the ICE reforms, which he called “a remarkable opportunity to de-escalate.”

Bennet, whose office recently announced new legislation that would require similar reforms for federal agents, was less hopeful that enough Republicans would support the proposals.

“We’re going to try to do it this week, and we’ll see,” he said. “I’ll make an evaluation by the end of the week, but I have not seen (Republicans) willing to stand up to Donald Trump’s lawlessness yet, and I don’t expect that they will.”

Even if the reforms were to pass, Denver immigration attorney Hans Meyer questioned whether ICE would follow new regulations. The agency has been repeatedly sued — including in Colorado — for sidestepping federal laws related to indefinite detentions and warrantless arrests.

Where Colorado’s members of Congress stand on Homeland Security funding in wake of Minneapolis shooting

Judges, in Colorado and across the country, to provide detainees with bail hearings and to ensure agents have probable cause before making arrests.

"You can't reform a gang of executioners and jackboots," Meyer said.

Meyer spoke with several people detained by ICE in traffic stops in Colorado last week, and he said he had "major concerns" that they were arrested without warrants and in violation of requirements set forth in a recent court order. Detained immigrants are also still being denied access to bail, he said.

In Minnesota, a federal judge grew that he ordered Todd Lyons, ICE's acting director, to personally appear in court later this week.

"Will ICE abide by these new criteria?" Hickenlooper said. "Well, they can't say they don't have enough money." The agency received tens of billions of dollars in new funding last year through the Republican tax-and-spending bill signed by President Donald Trump.

"This isn't (asking) a lot," Hickenlooper said of the reforms, "and if the Republican senators come on board, which I think they will, then it����ap going to be us having people looking over the shoulder, around the corner, watching everything that ICE does, and prosecuting them when they break the law."

Re: “Trump vetoes bill to fund pipeline,” Jan. 1 news story

In his epic recounting of the AIDS crisis in “And the Band Played On,” Randy Schilts wrote, “Politics knows only two principles: loyalty and revenge.”

Congress did its job, writing a bipartisan bill to ensure clean water to southeast Colorado. However, Trump is angry at Lauren Boebert for demanding the release of the Epstein files and he is mad because Tina Peters is getting the justice she deserves.

Even worse, southeast Colorado is strong Republican territory. Trump hurt his own constituents.

If the Republicans in the Senate had done the right thing at both of Trump’s impeachment hearings, he never would have run for a second term. It’s brutally apparent — and this began with Watergate — that Republicans are the “win elections at any and all costs” party.

The only way for this to stop is a massive blue wave at the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.

Mike Filion, Lakewood

Re: “Veto is Trump’s latest targeted hit on Colorado water,” Jan. 2 news story

The article described Donald Trump’s latest targeted hits on Colorado. It was suggested that some Colorado Republicans blame our state’s Democratic leaders for provoking Trump’s wrath. Examples provided were Attorney General Phil Weiser’s 49 lawsuits against the administration and Secretary of State Jena Griswold’s rejection of requests from the Justice Department to share sensitive voter information.

Totally irrelevant! No president of our United States should exact any wrath against any state at any time for any reason. Full stop!

Terri Tilliss, Parker

As a registered Republican and longtime Coloradan, it pains me to hear you, President Trump, ridicule our state. Our very intelligent voters, jurors, and even our immigrants understand things like the Constitution and even the way birds die ( a billion deaths a year from Buildings!) at a much higher level than our country’s leader. Please pick up a book, a newspaper (like our Denver Post), or watch a PBS show like “Nova.”

Tina Peters broke the law, and jurors, likely many Republicans given the district, found her guilty. She is where she belongs. Pay attention to the important things of running a country.

Steve Lorenz, Littleton

We do not need the DNC in Denver to boost the mayor

Re: “Denver seeks to host the 2028 Democratic National Convention,” Jan. 4 news story

We are living in an attention economy where attention drives capital at least as much as capital drives attention, but national attention will not make Denver vibrant.

Denver’s Vail-to-Yale mayor wants you to believe hosting the DNC would be “for Denver.” Denverites are smarter than that. We know the play, and it isn’t that attention will put money in our pockets. It����ap that our public dollars will buy attention — political capital — for Johnston. No one who actually reads The Denver Post is gullible enough to believe the federal government under Donald Trump will backstop a DNC, let alone a DNC in Denver, the way it did for Chicago under Joe Biden, right?

After all, since Mayor Mike Johnston has pitched Denver’s bid, the Trump administration has announced plans to freeze $10 billion in funding for childcare subsidies, social services and cash support for low-income families in five states controlled by Democrats, including Colorado, claiming widespread fraud throughout those states.

Let����ap be honest with ourselves and clear-eyed about what Denver’s mayor is proposing. Hosting the DNC won’t fix downtown. It won’t deliver “vibrancy.” Hell, it won’t even generate meaningfully more direct consumer spending than Taylor Swift����ap two Denver Eras Tour shows did in 2023 — estimated at $201.7 million, per the Common Sense Institute.

Chicago’s 2024 DNC generated only $200 million in direct spending, as The Denver Post re-reported. Denver already hosts big events that drive hundreds of millions in spending. We don’t need to subsidize a political spectacle to appease Johnston’s ego.

Hosting the DNC is a distraction that neither Denver nor an administration with a poor fiscal-management track record, scrambling to close a massive budget gap with layoffs and furloughs, can afford.

Greg Whitman, Creede

Xcel’s power move was the right call

Re: “Xcel’s power shutdown in Boulder County was unacceptable,” Jan. 4 commentary, “,” Jan. 4 commentary and “Implementing power outages doesn’t solve Xcel’s underlying safety issues,” letter to the editor

There is much vitriol aimed at Xcel for the recent power outages. The guest commentary in Sunday’s paper wrote, “The shutdown appears to have been a precautionary measure to limit Xcel Energy’s liability should aging or insufficiently maintained power lines fail and spark a fire.” I saw photos of power poles toppled by the wind. The poles did not look aged.

Many people seem to think the outages were performed only to limit liability. Of course this is a component, but the actions were to prevent another fire, perhaps not of Marshall proportions, but any fire.

Directly adjacent to this commentary was an article detailing how recovery from the Marshall fire is far from complete, with issues not limited to rebuilding but including the state of survivors’ physical, mental, and economic health.

For the first author attacking Xcel to state that there have been stronger wind events in Boulder, you can proclaim that there has never been an incident until there is. That����ap what happened Dec. 30, 2021.

For people who say there was no wind in their area, do you know about meteorological data collection, how the grid is set up, and what is involved in shutting off areas?

For the letter writer who states that “Xcel needs to be held responsible for improving and upgrading their infrastructure (at their expense)” — read our expense. Could the process have been managed better? Yes. Were the outages damaging to many? Yes. But this does not compare to what we witnessed four years ago.

C. Greenman, Lakewood

Anything bad can happen in gubernatorial race

Re: “Oltmann for Colo. governor? Spare us,” Jan. 4 commentary

As much as I admit to Krista Kafer’s integrity, I think she is in need of a reality check. Joe Oltmann for Colorado governor, or someone who shares his beliefs, is not so far-fetched.

Your once proud Republican brand is now morally bankrupt. It has now become the party of insurrection and sedition, election interference and delusional election peddlers, Trump loyalists and toadies.

If mainstream Republicans and right-leaning unaffiliated voters had any scruples, Trump would not have been elected for a second term.

Unserious candidates, I think not. Those who peddle conspiracy theories, defame innocent Americans and wish death upon their political rivals are parroting their maximum leader. Think again, Krista.

Leonard Juliano, Arvada

Follow the Firewise guidelines in home construction

As an insurance agent in Colorado for well over 20 years, I am very well-versed in Colorado’s guidelines, which are recognized by most, if not all, municipalities and insurance companies as the most effective guide for preventing fires and mitigating fire damage.

I have heard many comments over the past three years regarding what started the fire and whose fault it is. But, I have never heard one comment about the building codes and how close we allow homes to be built.

In new areas, builders erect homes that are, in many cases, less than 15 feet apart. Firewise guidelines for homeowners state a minimum of 30′ of defensible space around your home. Insurance companies use these same numbers when considering whether to issue or renew an insurance policy.

Plus, there are many other recommendations about what can surround your property as far out as 100 feet.

So, until our city planners really want to get serious about fire control and mitigation, and start by requiring a greater distance between new construction, we will see this same disaster occur again. And the likelihood that a change in building codes and zoning requirements will happen is zero, as too much money is involved for everyone concerned,
except for the end user, which is the homeowner.

It’s time we stop speaking out of both sides of our mouths and get real about making a change that will matter.

Bob Lowry, Highlands Ranch

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

What would it take for protests to be effective six months into a presidency that is being used to consistently breach the constitutional limits of the executive branch of government?

The answer may lie in the 2019 Puerto Rican Revolution — an event that was not a revolution but an inspiring display of the power Americans hold in our free and open democracy.

By the time protests peaked in Old San Juan, more than a million people had taken to the streets, spending days and nights banging pots and pans, reading the Constitution aloud, and chanting the simple demand that the governor resign.

Remarkably, he did.

Gov. Ricardo Rosselló Nevares resigned in disgrace, leaving La Fortaleza – the oldest governor’s mansion in the United States – along with key members of the cabinet who had already left saying they felt a “moral obligation to resign.” Both external (the protests) and internal (talk of an impeachment process) pressures weighed on Nevares, but there’s no doubt that if the public had remained on the sidelines, Nevares would have remained in office.

The protests were substantially peaceful, although small skirmishes resulting in arrests, damage to property and injuries broke out when police tried to disperse the crowd with rubber bullets and tear gas. At one point, an interstate was shut down by protesters, and government offices were sometimes inaccessible because of the crowds. Protesters also were creative, taking to the ocean in kayaks and boats after streets outside La Fortaleza were closed for what the government called “security reasons.”

Could what happened in Puerto Rico happen on the mainland? Could peaceful protests really oust a man who took office with the support of a majority of American voters and who rules the Republican Party with an iron fist?

After researching the Puerto Rico Revolution and talking to a cultural anthropologist about what powered the persistence and intensity of protests in the Caribbean archipelago, I believe under the right conditions, Americans could sustain a protest long enough to bring about a voluntary change in leadership.

Carlos G. García-Quijano and Hilda Lloréns are professors of anthropology at the University of Rhode Island, who in on the “core cultural values” that fueled the summer protests.

“That����ap the key part,” García-Quijano told me in an interview about his and Lloréns’ research. “Is there an issue or an action by a government that most people in the society will find objectionable, abhorrent or unfair enough that they can all agree for a moment, a brief moment sometimes, to work together despite their differences to protest?”

In Puerto Rico, their research found that the governor’s shockingly offensive messages on a chat group violated core cultural values held dear by most Puerto Ricans – “humility, respect for others and having some sense of shame.” Dissatisfaction with the administration had been building, including after revelations that key members of the government had been arrested by the FBI in the midst of a corruption scandal. But it was truly the disgusting messages that tipped the scales.

So first, Americans would need to coalesce around a core cultural value that Trump has violated. I am not sure if there is an issue that could lead millions of people to leave their jobs and families at home while they traveled to the nation’s Capitol to peacefully demand a resignation. This would be no vacation — hotels would be full, protest organizers would be unable to supply adequate food and water, and for it to be effective, commerce in the city would likely have to stop.

Naively in 2016, I thought Trump’s degrading remarks about women captured by an Access Hollywood video would be the end of the man’s political career. But America’s core cultural values are always shifting. We re-elected President Bill Clinton after he had oral sex several times with a 22-year-old intern in a corridor outside the Oval Office and then lied about it repeatedly. We re-elected Trump after his insurrection attempt.

So, if Americans, on the mainland, no longer value humility and respect, and are OK with shamelessness, what could be the spark that ignites mass peaceful protests in Washington, D.C., and outside his home in Florida?

Trump’s reckless disregard for the Fifth Amendment could be the spark. Americans from all walks of life understand that a cornerstone of our freedom is that the federal government cannot deprive us of “life, liberty or property without due process of law.”

Some Americans seem to be convinced – erroneously – that the Fifth Amendment only applies to U.S. citizens and are thus far unconcerned by the masked, plain-clothed immigration police that are snatching people from the streets and job sites without exercising due process.

If Trump’s police force erroneously snatch and deport a U.S. citizen, it could be enough for Americans to wake up to the dangers of bypassing habeas corpus. If they take you at night with no due process, you won’t even have the chance to prove you are a citizen before you’re on a plane out of the country.

“Every culture, and this is something that anthropologists work with a lot, has different agendas and levels of power, and different ways to exercise their power,”  Cultures have agency, and people change culture and how they use their power,” García-Quijano said, talking generally about cultural anthropology and not about specific events in America today.

What could ignite a protest today may not be what would do it in a year from today.

But a spark also needs fuel.

It seems unlikely that a single-day organized protest such as “No Kings” could make a difference, even in swaying the policy decisions of Trump. In Puerto Rico, the protesters met the governor at the airport after he returned from a trip, followed him to the fortress, and then persisted for more than two weeks.

“How massive the protests were was important, that was a part of it, but also a big part of it was that they were still protesting day after day. People need to get back to their lives at some point, return to work or school, but those protests, they wouldn’t quit,” García-Quijano said.

I do think Trump is likely to fuel the protests with his disdain for the First Amendment����ap right to speech, assembly, and petition. Trump was quick to deploy the California National Guard on protesters in California after less than a day of riots. Large groups of protesters and others drawn to the chaos decided to vandalize cars, buildings, and assault police as part of the demonstrations in Los Angeles. Others looted stores. Police intervention was needed, but nothing rose to the level of requiring a U.S. military response.

Trump’s heavy-handedness in Los Angeles points to how he would meet mass protests in D.C. The situation would be dangerous and volatile. Leaders of the protests would be responsible for the deaths and injuries that occurred if Trump’s military response provoked violent riots, or worse if the police opened fire on civilians. Keeping the protests peaceful in the face of a crackdown on speech would both fuel the outrage and save lives and property.

García-Quijano said they found protesters in Puerto Rico “kept referring to what united them on this issue.”

Americans, however, are more polarized than ever.

President Donald Trump has suffered two assassination attempts, largely because of the rhetoric that he is a danger to America’s constitutional republic. It is one reason why so many journalists are responsibly turning down their language as they write and report about Trump, while also trying to document all the ways he has eroded our Constitution.

Our society cannot move forward thus divided, but I do think we would find common ground in opposing a threat to our Constitution.

Finding a “core cultural value” that we all share and standing up for that right or social norm together could be what saves America.

This is a lot to ask of Trump supporters or even conservatives in general, who will ask where my call for mass protest was when I disagreed with how Biden was handling the Venezuelan refugee crisis. It����ap true, while I called on Biden to secure the border and establish refugee camps, I never called for his resignation or for the kind of mass protests that could have actually gotten his administration to face the crisis head-on. The truth is I remain somewhat unworried about the thousands of asylum seekers who came to America — only a few have proven to be dangerous gang-affiliated criminals. Opposing illegal immigration is simply not a core value of mine.

I would ask that all Americans watch the president’s actions closely in the coming months and resolve that if and when he violates their core values they be willing to stand up for this country.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Bird, vice chair of the powerful Joint Budget Committee in the state legislature, is the third Democrat to announce their bid for the congressional seat. It is one of the most competitive districts in the country and could prove pivotal to which party controls Congress in 2027.

In an interview before her announcement, Bird highlighted her experience in the legislature passing laws to fully fund public schools for the first time in a decade, to ease new construction by reforming construction liability regulations, and to create new tax credits for higher education.

She said economic stability and cost of living will be keystones to her campaign — while also taking shots at Evans for, in her view, putting President Donald Trump’s agenda ahead of his constituents. Democrats have repeatedly hammered Evans for a lack of in-person townhalls. He held a telephone town hall in April.

“The more I thought about the situation that we find ourselves in today, and watched what this administration is doing, with Gabe Evans’ support, one thing became clear to me: There’s going to be a time when people ask, ‘What did you do when Donald Trump came back into office for a second term?’ ” Bird said of her decision to run. “Especially in light of what he’s doing to our country, I know that I want to have the right answer.”

She would not commit to investigations or impeachment inquiries into Trump, but did not dismiss them outright. Asked twice, Bird said she would focus on “volatility” in Washington and how it is affecting the economy and cost of living, and pledged to “show up and be accountable” to constituents.

“I can’t tell you the number of people who have thought they were going to be able to retire, have seen their 401(k)s take a nose dive, and now have no idea how long they’re going to need to stay in the workforce,” Bird said.

The 8th Congressional District stretches from Thornton to Greeley. It was drawn following the 2020 census. Voters there elected Democrat Yadira Caraveo as their first member of Congress in 2022, and ousted her in favor of Evans in the following election. Each race was determined by fewer than 2,500 votes.

Bird said she didn’t have any particular thoughts on what tipped the district in the victor’s favor in the two elections, but would commit to “being everywhere” during the campaign to break it in her favor and best represent the people there.

Bird also contrasted her approach to Evans and blasted him for voting for a spending package that would in a district where nearly rely on the public health insurance.

A nonpartisan analysis from the Penn Wharton Budget Model found the GOP spending package would vastly benefit the richest Americans, , and lower the take-home income of the poorest. Republicans argue the package would spur economic growth in the country, which the analysis did not factor in.

Bird will have to win a Democratic primary next summer before she faces Evans in the general election. Caraveo, the former congresswoman, announced last month that she intends to win back the seat. State Rep. Manny Rutinel, a Commerce City Democrat, announced his bid to oust Evans just weeks after the new congressman took office in January. It helped him win an early fundraising advantage.

Bird said she respects anyone who throws their hat into the political ring — but that her six years at the state Capitol, and time on the Westminster City Council before that, set her apart.

Vizguerra is not a threat to safety — she runs a local nonprofit, works at Target and has raised four children, three who are U.S. citizens.

Vizguerra is not a drain on society — there’s no indication Vizguerra has ever been on any type of welfare.

So why was the 53-year-old grandmother detained by federal officials outside of a Colorado Target this week and shackled in a chain and handcuffs? And why are local Republicans smearing her good name as if she is a gang member freshly arrested for brandishing a weapon?

We don’t have to guess.

President Donald Trump is on a mission to eradicate immigrants from the United States who came here illegally — all 10 million to 15 million of them — regardless of what they contribute to our communities. Since he first launched a bid for president in 2015, Trump has intentionally painted all illegal immigrants as dangerous criminals. He sees no difference between a mother working hard to support four children and a Tren de Aragua member engaged in organized criminal activity.

The stated mission of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has not changed, according to its website: “to protect America through criminal investigations and enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.”

According to Denver’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, their goal is still “to protect the homeland through the arrest and removal of noncitizens who undermine the safety of our communities.”

Vizguerra is not a threat to national security or public safety. She should not be deported and we call for her immediate release from the ICE detention facility in Aurora.

Vizguerra has repeatedly been granted stays of deportation so she could remain in America with her family.

Arresting her this week only makes a mockery of the hard, dangerous and serious work ICE officials perform every week to keep Americans safe from violent criminals who entered the country illegally. The federal employees at ICE did not sign up for their jobs to terrorize communities and steal grandmothers from their families without even a goodbye.

We have questions about Vizguerra’s legal status. Her family says she was working at Target but the Writ of Habeas Corpus her attorneys filed on her behalf admits that Vizguerra has no legal status in the U.S. Those two things are incompatible under current law.

America’s undocumented workers face this crush of obligation versus legality daily. For decades leaders — both Republicans and Democrats — have refused to provide a path to legal work or legal status but also have failed to secure the border from new illegal crossings.

Now it����ap too late. For the next four years Trump will deport as many illegal immigrants as he can, ignoring decades of wisdom from past leaders who have said splitting up families and driving people from good jobs into hiding where they often turn to crime to make ends meet is not good for communities.

Since 2011, Vizguerra has been fighting a deportation order that stemmed from her 2009 arrest in Arapahoe County for a fake Social Security card found in her bag by deputies who had pulled her over for a traffic violation. She has unsuccessfully appealed the order, but has repeatedly been granted stays of deportation, in essence, legal permission to remain in America despite her deportation orders.

In 2017, shortly after President Donald Trump first took office, her application for renewal of her stay of deportation was denied, and she took shelter in the First Unitarian Society Church in Denver claiming sanctuary from removal.

Her story gained national attention, and we supported her efforts to remain with her young children and wrote an editorial that called for immigration reform that would secure the border and also provide the millions of people living in the shadows in fear of deportation a path to legal status and legal employment. We wrote: “Presented with the known facts at hand, we ask what would be the point of deporting Vizguerra? What would the United States of America gain from such a cruel, though legal, action? Would enforcement be worth the harm done to (four) innocent American children?”

Trump has failed to ever articulate a single answer to those questions because the answer of course is that there is no point of deporting Vizguerra, there is nothing for the U.S. to gain from this cruelty and the harm goes far beyond just her family.

The best case we can make against Vizguerra being permitted to remain in the United States is the simple fact that a judge ordered her removal and she disobeyed it before she was granted her first stay of deportation and then again in 2017 when she claimed sanctuary. As a society we cannot ignore judicial orders — the price we pay for that of course is the judge’s wrath as he doles out sentences for contempt of court.

We can’t see how Trump could make the argument that Vizguerra undermined the judicial system with a straight face, however, as he is now engaging in an orchestrated attempt to undermine the judicial branch, lashing out at judges he disagrees with, calling for their impeachment and ignoring their orders.

Undermining our judicial branch’s authority is a direct threat to the core of our republic — three co-equal branches of government working in tandem to preserve American’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

If Trump wants America to abide faithfully and without deviation to the courts, he must lead the way with his own actions first. Then we will be glad to have a conversation about whether or not the actions of those who sought sanctuary from judicial deportation orders pose a threat to America’s judicial order great enough to warrant their removal from this country.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea’s opposition parties moved Wednesday to impeach the president over the shocking and short-lived that drew heavily armed troops to encircle parliament before lawmakers climbed walls to reenter the building and unanimously voted to lift his order.

Impeaching Yoon Suk Yeol would require the support of two-thirds of parliament, and at least six justices of the nine-member Constitutional Court would have to endorse it to remove him. The motion to impeach, submitted jointly by the main liberal opposition Democratic Party and five smaller opposition parties, could be put to a vote as early as Friday.

Yoon’s senior policy advisers and Defense Minster Kim Yong Hyun offered to resign as the nation struggled to make sense of what appeared to be a poorly conceived stunt. The Democratic Party submitted a separate motion to impeach Kim, who allegedly recommended the martial law declaration to Yoon.

In his speech announcing the abrupt order Tuesday night, Yoon vowed to eliminate “anti-state” forces and continued to criticize the Democratic Party’s attempts to impeach key government officials and senior prosecutors. But martial law lasted only about six hours, ending after the National Assembly voted to overrule Yoon and his Cabinet formally lifted it before daybreak Wednesday.

, who hold a majority in the 300-seat parliament, called on Yoon to quit immediately or they would take steps to impeach him.

Yoon’s martial law declaration “was a clear violation of the constitution. It didn’t abide by any requirements to declare it,” a party statement said. The order “was originally invalid and a grave violation of the constitution. It was a grave act of rebellion and provides perfect grounds for his impeachment.”

What happens if Yoon is impeached?

Impeaching him would require support from 200 National Assembly members. The Democratic Party and other small opposition parties together have 192 seats. But they could seek additional votes from Yoon’s ruling conservative People Power Party.

The 190-0 vote that rejected martial law included the votes of 18 lawmakers from the PPP, according to National Assembly officials. Party leader Han Dong-hun and Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, also a member, criticized Yoon’s martial law declaration.

If Yoon is impeached, he will be stripped of his constitutional powers until the Constitutional Court rules. Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, who holds the No. 2 position in the South Korean government, would take over presidential responsibilities. Han issued a public message pleading for patience and calling for Cabinet members to “fulfill your duties even after this moment.”

The Constitutional Court has only six incumbent justices following three retirements. That means all six must approve the impeachment motion for it to succeed. The court includes justices appointed after Yoon took office, so the Democratic Party is expected to speed up the process of exercising its right to recommend two of the three new justices.

Yoon’s martial law declaration, the first of its kind in more than 40 years, harkened back to South Korea’s when authorities occasionally proclaimed martial law and other decrees that allowed them to station soldiers, tanks and armored vehicles on streets or at public places such as schools to prevent anti-government demonstrations. Until Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, such scenes of military intervention had not been seen since South Korea achieved a democracy in the late 1980s.

Dramatic hours at the parliament

After Yoon’s declaration, troops carrying full battle gear, including assault rifles, tried to keep protesters away from the National Assembly as military helicopters flew overhead and landed nearby. One soldier pointed his assault rifle at a woman who was among protesters outside the building demanding that the martial law be lifted.

It wasn’t clear how the 190 lawmakers were able to enter a parliamentary hall to vote down Yoon’s martial law decree. Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung and National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik were seen climbing over walls. As troops and police officers blocked some from entering, they didn’t aggressively restrain or use force against others.

No major violence was reported. The troops and police personnel were later seen leaving the grounds of the National Assembly after the parliamentary vote to lift the martial law. Woo said: “Even with our unfortunate memories of military coups, our citizens have surely observed the events of today and saw the maturity of our military.”

Under South Korea’s constitution, the president can declare martial law during “wartime, war-like situations or other comparable national emergency states” that require the use of military force to restrict the freedom of press, assembly and other rights to maintain order. Many observers question whether South Korea is currently in such a state.

The constitution also states that the president must oblige when the National Assembly demands the lifting of martial law with a majority vote.

A presidential official said Yoon decided to impose martial law to resolve a political deadlock and did it in the middle of night to minimize its effect on the economy. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the issue.

Some experts say Yoon clearly violated the constitution. While martial law allows “special measures” to restrict individual freedoms and the authority of agencies and courts, the constitution does not permit the functions of parliament to be restricted.

But in following Yoon’s declaration on Tuesday, the South Korean military proclaimed that parliamentary activities were suspended and deployed troops to try to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.

Park Chan-dae, the Democratic Party’s floor leader, called for Yoon to be immediately investigated on charges of rebellion over the way he deployed troops to the parliament. While the president mostly enjoys immunity from prosecution while in office, the protection does not extend to allegations of rebellion or treason.

In Seoul, the streets were busy Wednesday, like a normal weekday.

Tourist Stephen Rowan, from Brisbane, Australia, who was touring Gyeongbokgung Palace, said he was not concerned. He heard about calls for the president’s resignation and expected demonstrations.

“I would have been concerned if martial law had stayed enforced,” he said.

Natalia Slavney, research analyst at the Stimson Center’s 38 North website, which focuses on Korean affairs, said Yoon’s imposition of martial law was “a serious backslide of democracy” that followed a “worrying trend of abuse” since he took office in 2022.

___

Associated Press Writer Jennifer McDermott contributed to this report.