Standing on a street corner in Denver’s historically Black Five Points neighborhood, a group of activists, elected officials and mothers of those slain by police called on the attorney general to commit to retrying the cases and publicly acknowledge the previous convictions.

“What this system told us yesterday was liberty and justice for all — except Elijah McClain and anyone that looks like him,” said MiDian Shofner, CEO of the .

The appeals court on Thursday reversed homicide convictions for Peter Cichuniec and Jeremy Cooper, the former paramedics, ruling that the district court failed to properly instruct the jury on the standard of care applicable to the criminally negligent homicide charge. The three-judge panel upheld Cichuniec’s second-degree assault by drugging conviction.

Attorney General Phil Weiser, in a statement Thursday, said his office would appeal the decision.

McClain, a 23-year-old Black man, died after Aurora police put him in a neck hold and Cooper injected him with an overdose of ketamine, a sedative. He was coming from a convenience store on Aug. 24, 2019, after buying a few cans of iced tea when a 911 caller reported a “sketchy” Black man walking down the street in a ski mask, waving his arms. McClain was unarmed and not suspected of committing any crimes.

His death sparked massive racial justice protests in Colorado in 2020 and spurred state lawmakers to pass a series of criminal justice reform bills. After prosecutors initially declined to file charges against the officers and paramedics, Gov. Jared Polis .

The court’s decision Thursday reaffirmed what Black leaders have long known about America’s justice system, they said during Friday’s news conference. , a 14-year-old Black boy who was lynched in 1955 after offending a white woman in a grocery store, “warned us about what happened to Elijah McClain,” Shofner said. So did , a 15-year-old shot in 1991 in Los Angeles by a convenience store owner.

“Yet we are supposed to believe that we are in a post-racist society,” Shofner said. She recalled the thousands of people who took to the streets in 2020, rallying for racial justice. The problem, Shofner said, “is that we confuse progress for permanence.”

“So I have to ask myself,” she said. “Where did all the good allies go?”

Veronica Seabron knows all too well what McClain’s mother is going through. Her son Jalin, in February 2025, was killed after being shot nine times in the back by a Douglas County deputy. The district attorney declined to file charges against the deputy.

The court’s ruling Thursday “punched me in the stomach,” Seabron said.

“Behind every reopened case is a mother,” she said. “This isn’t just a case number or a headline.”

Seabron wore black, red and white to the news conference — black to remember the lives lost; red to symbolize the bloodshed; and white for the purity of the deceased’s souls.

Shofner said the community stands ready to launch protests once again. The systems, she said, have simply not done enough.

“Our demands are clear; our demands are reasonable,” Shofner said. “We will be watching.”

But winning the attorney general’s race won’t come easy if her Democratic primary opponents have anything to say about it.

Ask them, and they’ll say Griswold is guilty of false advertising, is under-credentialed for the job, has skipped multiple campaign debates and forums, or is simply on a laddered quest for higher and higher office — with ultimate aspirations to land in the governor’s mansion.

For months, the best-known candidate in the race, who’s a lawyer but hasn’t done as much litigating as her competitors, has been a magnet for attacks.

“(Attorney general) is one of the most important offices to fight for the future of our country,” said David Seligman, 43, who heads up the nonprofit public interest law firm Towards Justice and is one of three Democrats taking on Griswold in the June 30 primary. “It’s too important to be a stepping stone.”

Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty, another primary candidate, attacking Griswold for falsely claiming that she argued the lawsuit at the U.S. Supreme Court that aimed to keep Donald Trump off Colorado’s 2024 presidential ballot. The court later ruled against that lawsuit, which was brought by Republican and unaffiliated voters. Griswold was a named defendant due to her position and filed a brief in support of the ballot challenge, and an attorney representing her was allotted time in arguments.

“The woman who argued the case at the Supreme Court was not Jena Griswold,” Dougherty told The Denver Post. “I would expect someone to call me out if I said I handled a case when I didn’t.”

Griswold, 41, called it “unfortunate” that her Democratic opponents had gone negative, saying the field should be “laser-focused on the problem ahead of us — it’s the Trump illegality.”

“As secretary of state, I helped lead the fight to defend democracy against (President) Donald Trump, and as attorney general, I’ll stand up to Trump and MAGA extremists to protect our democracy and fundamental rights,” she said.

Griswold cited her record of holding former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters accountable for her criminal role in an election equipment security breach following the 2020 election. Peters was released from prison earlier this week after Gov. Jared Polis granted her clemency in May.

She also pointed to her efforts to keep Trump off the Colorado ballot following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, “despite facing death threats,” as well as her refusal to “hand over Coloradans’ sensitive voter data to the federal government” after Trump retook the White House last year.

“The most burning issue is protecting Coloradans, our state and doing our part to protect the nation from Trump’s lawlessness,” Griswold said. “I’m going to do everything in my power to stop this administration from breaking the law and hurting our state.”

Griswold has a sizable target on her back because she is the candidate holding the most prominent position in the Democratic pack. The only statewide officeholder in the contest, she’s raised nearly twice as much money as her nearest competitor — $1.9 million as of Monday, the most recent filing deadline.

Two Republicans — El Paso County District Attorney Michael Allen and attorney David Willson — are facing off in their own primary at the end of the month for their party’s nomination for the November general election.

‘She’s a politician’

While Griswold has more name recognition than her Democratic opponents, a distinct advantage in a down-ballot race, University of Colorado at Boulder law professor Douglas Spencer said that doesn’t mean she has the contest wrapped up.

Griswold, he said, has cast herself in a political light — in large part by intensely focusing on Trump. (Griswold mentioned Trump or his administration 20 times during a 15-minute interview with The Denver Post for this story.)

It’s a focus she has been criticized for in her current role as chief overseer of elections in Colorado. While potentially strategic in a battle for a strictly political post like governor, such outspokenness may rub voters the wrong way if they’re looking for a more law-and-order approach from their attorney general, Spencer said.

“It is the chief law enforcement office, and the office gives you discretion over which cases to bring or not bring,” he said. “Some voters may say, ‘Let the political people go after Trump on the political front.’ Griswold’s biggest strength is probably her biggest weakness — she’s a politician.”

How much that will be a liability is uncertain in a state like Colorado, where the dislike for the president runs particularly deep and is borne out in Trump’s repeated losses in the state over the last three presidential election cycles.

The current attorney general, Phil Weiser, has aggressively gone after the Trump administration since he returned to office early last year. Weiser, who is term-limited from running again, has either brought directly or joined other states in filing 65 lawsuits against the White House over a multitude of issues, including immigration, federal funding cuts and tariffs.

In nearly half of those actions, the plaintiffs have won a preliminary injunction against the administration or a favorable ruling, said Lawrence Pacheco, a spokesman for Weiser’s office.

Weiser, a Democrat, is running for Colorado governor against U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet in the primary. Griswold said she would keep up his robust pace of resistance to Trump if she succeeds him in his current office.

“I will absolutely continue to keep this administration at bay,” she said.

Her Democratic opponents share Griswold’s revulsion toward the man in the White House, but they say it matters how litigation is pursued. And that’s where courtroom experience comes in, they say.

Dougherty, who worked as a prosecutor in the Manhattan district attorney’s office before moving to Colorado to head up the DNA Justice Review Project of then-Attorney General John Suthers, a Republican, said Griswold lacks courtroom experience.

“As a leader, you should be willing to do the work you’re asking others to do,” he said.

Dougherty, 54, was the lead prosecutor in the 2021 Boulder King Soopers mass shooting and the 2025 Pearl Street Mall antisemitic firebombing cases. Both resulted in convictions.

It’s not just a matter of bringing cases, Dougherty said, but of figuring out which will most likely result in successful outcomes.

“Do we have enough evidence to take Donald Trump to court? That’s a decision that requires legal experience and leadership,” he said. “I believe the next AG has to have legal experience and integrity.”

Hetal Doshi, a former federal prosecutor in Colorado, said on-the-ground experience is crucial. Her pursuit of cartels, fraudsters and scammers as an assistant U.S. attorney wouldn’t have been as effective without courtroom experience in front of a jury, she said.

“We just can’t risk having that type of figurehead leader instead of a real leader,” said Doshi, 47, who later served as deputy assistant attorney general overseeing the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.

And candidates have to show up for the voters — Doshi said Griswold has missed a number of recent debates.

“The failure to show up and not answer people is a failure of accountability,” she said. “You, as the voter, are entitled to know what I think.”

Griswold makes her case

As secretary of state, a mom and an attorney general candidate, Griswold said she’s had a full schedule.

Still, she said she’d attended nine forums as of late May and held 10 town halls. Two of her opponents, she said, “bought their way on to the ballot” — a reference to through the petition process rather than the caucus system. Griswold and Seligman secured their spots through the party’s state assembly.

Griswold, who is a 2011 graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, acknowledges that she is not a career litigator but says the job of attorney general doesn’t require that.

“We are fortunate that Colorado has an attorney general’s office that is full of literally hundreds of legal experts on all aspects of Colorado law,” she said. “The AG is not the lead trial attorney — it’s the person setting the legal direction and managing a very large organization.”

The Colorado Attorney General’s Office has just over 700 lawyers and staff.

Her lists Griswold as having been a litigation associate for two years at the law firm in Washington, D.C., more than a decade ago, where she “practiced general litigation with a focus on Latin America and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.” She has also worked in the offices of then-Gov. John Hickenlooper — as a liaison between his administration and the federal government — and U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette.

Griswold said voters want someone to stand up to Trump and appreciate the perspective she brings from growing up in a working-class family and living through many of the challenges Coloradans face.

“I’m the candidate best-equipped to deliver for Colorado voters,” she said.

Griswold’s biggest stumble as secretary of state came days before the November 2024 election, when it was revealed that partial voting system passwords had inadvertently been leaked online months earlier. An investigation found that her office violated two state information security policies that contributed to the release of the passwords, but it absolved her and her staff of wrongdoing.

In March, on the day of the Democratic state assembly, Griswold faced allegations from a former employee who publicly accused her of creating “a hostile and volatile workplace” and a “climate of fear of retaliation” as secretary of state. That employee, Reese Edwards, served as the office’s director of government and public affairs in 2019 and 2020.

He wrote in a statement that he was speaking on behalf of six other “former executive and senior level staff” at Griswold’s office who “fear retaliation and retribution for their jobs and their careers.” They were not identified in the statement.

“They fear what she might try to do to them if she gets her hands on the most powerful judicial position in Colorado,” Edwards wrote.

Griswold declined to address the situation during her interview with The Post. She said she oversees an office of more than 150 employees with a $50 million budget and is “really proud of everything that the staff has accomplished.”

Spencer, the law school professor and an election law scholar, said voters will have to cut through the campaign noise and decide a fundamental question when it comes to who will become their next attorney general.

“Are we choosing somebody we trust to wield discretion in a way that will benefit our state and protect the rule of law?” he said.

The debate, opened with Rep. Scott Bottoms and Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer accusing the race’s front-runner, nonprofit leader Victor Marx, of being a fraud and a con man. (“You’re mean,” he replied as his dog sat at his feet). It included Bottoms admitting that he had falsely claimed that every Venezuelan immigrant in the state was a gang member; he later said he might give a job to a prominent conspiracist podcaster, so long as the job wasn’t “around Jewish people.” (That drew an incredulous laugh from Kirkmeyer).

The debate ended with Marx saying a prayer and Kirkmeyer, who represents the GOP’s more establishment wing, arguing that only she was qualified to serve as governor.

The debate repeatedly turned to Marx’s extensive personal history, and at one point, moderator Kyle Clark asked Marx how voters can tell if he’s lived one of the most extraordinary lives of any person to ever exist — or if he was just a liar. Marx describes himself as a “high-risk humanitarian” who says his nonprofit has served tens of thousands people across the globe, often in conflict zones.

He told Clark that he had documented all of his nonprofit’s work and that he stood by how he has portrayed his background.

“I can’t help it if I’ve lived an extraordinary life,” he said. “I’m an ordinary fella.”

The debate primarily served as a public vetting of the candidates’ backgrounds before the June 30 primary, and it was the first time that Bottoms, Kirkmeyer and Marx have shared a debate stage during the campaign. Marx pulled out of one debate last month and declined to participate in another, co-hosted by The Denver Post.

For Bottoms and Kirkmeyer, who hail from different ideological factions of the GOP, the debate was a chance to close with and criticize Marx while highlighting their own goals and plans. A longtime county commissioner who has become one of the legislature’s budget-writers, Kirkmeyer repeatedly highlighted her experience, at times correcting the other candidates.

“I’m the only one who has actually governed, and I have decreased taxes,” she said. “I have balanced budgets. I’ve built roads. I have backed the blue.”

Bottoms, a conservative pastor from Colorado Springs, said, without evidence, that he had been warned about Marx by the CIA and FBI. He said he would send the National Guard into Colorado cities that don’t cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. He said he would arrest those cities’ mayors, and he predicted that the state’s Democratic attorney general and secretary of state would be indicted and tried for treason by midsummer.

Where there was concrete policy, there was often some agreement. Bottoms and Marx said they would give former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters a full pardon; Kirkmeyer said she wouldn’t and said she didn’t believe Peters’ claims that Democrats have rigged elections in the state. All three candidates said they would work to roll back state laws that generally prevent state and local officials from working with federal immigration authorities, with Bottoms and Marx saying they would withhold funding from cities that don’t cooperate with immigration enforcement.

All three argued that Democrats’ electoral gains and political control in the state have steered Colorado in the wrong direction, and they pledged to right the ship.

“For the last eight years, we’ve had one-party control. Democrats have been in charge, and they have made a mess out of our state,” Kirkmeyer said. “They’ve made us unaffordable, unsafe; we’re unraveling.”

For Marx, the debate offered an opportunity to lean into the policy-light, charm-heavy approach that has helped him raise $2.6 million and catapult him from political newcomer to the front-runner of the Republican primary campaign. He joked that he had cracked open the state budget recently and that it was “pretty complicated.” (“Not for me,” Kirkmeyer interjected.)

He said he wasn’t a politician — earning another jab from Kirkmeyer — and said he would use his negotiating skills to work with the Democratic lawmakers who have near-supermajority control of the legislature. No Republican has been elected governor in more than 20 years, and whoever wins the Republican primary will face steep odds in reversing that trend.

Marx told Kirkmeyer and Bottoms that they couldn’t win, and he dismissed their criticism as “the rhetoric of someone who’s desperate, who’s already lost.”

“I’m a negotiator, not a debator,” he said. “That’s the difference we’re going to see tonight.”

Election Day for the GOP and Democratic primaries is June 30. The Republican winner will take on either U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet or state Attorney General Phil Weiser, who are competing for the Democratic nomination.

Re: “Clemency for Tina Peters emboldens the election denialism movement,” May 24 commentary

As usual, the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot. Instead of condemning Donald Trump for involving us in a war of choice with Iran, tearing down the East Wing of the White House for his golden ballroom (he now needs taxpayer money to build), creating a slush fund for his cronies, and exempting himself and his family from any IRS audits, they censure Gov. Jared Polis, who is a fine governor.

Polis will leave his administration having walked a fine line with the Trump administration concerning ICE, and he has attempted to stop Trump from closing federal government programs in Colorado. Polis will leave with no scandals, no self-aggrandizements, no disgrace and no golden ballroom.

Tina Peters, a despicable woman who does not believe in democracy, yet was an election official, was given a harsh sentence (nine years) because she was not contrite at her sentencing. First, Polis reduced this sentence to 4.5 years. It is well known that if you behave well in prison, your sentence is reduced by about half, which means she should serve 2.25 years. She served 2 years. Being a nasty woman is not a crime. Big deal! Shame on Dems for censuring our fine, honest governor.

Gari Westkott, Lakewood

No, I am not happy about Gov. Polis commuting the prison sentence of Tina Peters. However, consider this:

In his letter to Peters, he did not pardon her. And the letter was dated on May 15.

On May 14, it was announced that the federal government would release $47 million in federal funding for Colorado water projects. The Trump administration initially froze $152 million in funding that the Biden administration had awarded the state to address drought.

This was blatant blackmail, courtesy of President Donald Trump. Gov. Polis didn’t have any wiggle room.

Show some mercy on our governor.

Mike Filion, Lakewood

Polis’ name will become a metaphor for failed integrity

I’m with all those who regret voting for Jared Polis. Unlike The Denver Post Editorial Board, the arguments for commutation fall flat with me, as they must with most Coloradans.

No, Jared. Freedom of speech? Even a middle school student would perceive a stark difference between someone who voices a bogus theory and someone who acts on it. And as Secretary of State Jena Griswold and Molly Fitzpatrick, Boulder County clerk and recorder, aptly point out, the courts are well attuned to the need to protect First Amendment rights and were already poised to provide Peters with eventual relief.

At least Polis cannot grant himself clemency for the damage to his legacy. I predict that his name will become a metaphor. There will be more local politicians who fail the integrity test and become treasonous to their constituents. In the future, each will risk being pejoratively described as a “Jared Polis.”

And metaphors have great life and longevity. Just ask Benedict Arnold.

Scott Newell, Denver

Are we better off as a country under Trump?

Re: “Hopefully Democrats won’t regain power for ‘a long, long time’,” May 24 letter to the editor

We all know the Democrats have made mistakes in the past, fair enough — but I would like to know what people now think about Donald Trump‘s commitment to put America First.

Has President Trump delivered on promises to improve the economy, reduce inflation, make groceries more affordable, and keep gas prices low? Just the opposite.

Has he avoided entangling the country in costly, destabilizing foreign wars with no clear strategic plan or likely path to success? Has he strengthened relationships with allies, reinforced confidence in American leadership, or discouraged countries from deepening their ties with China? Hardly.

Were tariffs implemented as part of a carefully designed strategy to strengthen key industries and create jobs? I don’t think so. His erratic, punitive and ultimately unconstitutional approach to tariffs has resulted in an economic mess of payouts to farmers and reimbursements.

And what public benefit comes from using our government to target Trump’s opponents, payoff Trump’s allies, reduce scientific research, attack universities, weaken environmental protections, pardon individuals convicted of fraud or other crimes, or build a ballroom? Do we have to break our own laws in order to address illegal immigration?

Ultimately, are we better off as a country, or is Trump the main beneficiary? Be careful what you wish for. And when someone constantly lies, maybe you should stop believing what they say.

Steve Brown, Denver

Melat Kiros for U.S. House in CD1

We are in this moment in our nation’s history, in part, because congresspeople like Rep. Diana DeGette have failed to meet the needs of the American people. Rather, they offer us “safe” and watered-down laws that are acceptable to their funders – the corporations and special interest millionaires who fund their campaigns and perpetuate the status quo.

President Trump is right about one thing – the system is rigged. It����ap rigged to make us think we have a choice, when in fact both parties — Democrats and Republicans alike — accept money from the same corporations and special interests. It����ap rigged to keep our legislators dependent on their contributions so they can stay in power and perpetuate the status quo.

This is why I support Melat Kiros for Congress in Denver’s 1st Congressional District and encourage your readers to learn about her before deciding who to vote for in the June 30 primary election. She is serious about reform. Her priorities include getting money out of politics in favor of public campaign financing, and she advocates for congressional term limits.

Importantly, Kiros walks the walk — she is running a grassroots campaign and is not accepting a penny from corporate PACS (unlike Rep. DeGette). She even studies reform and money in politics as she works on her Ph.D. ��Don’t let her age fool you; what she lacks in experience, she makes up for in intelligence and courage.

Charlene Parris, Denver

David Seligman for Colorado attorney general

I’m incredibly concerned about the many problems facing our state and our country. The lawlessness, corruption, hypocrisy and plain old evil coming out of the White House these days is astounding and overwhelming. We’ve already seen our elected leaders struggle to meet this moment and fight back. Too few people with the power to do something will stand up to the Trump administration and tell them to stop terrorizing our communities, abolish ICE, or use the law in creative ways to defend our communities.

We must elect people who are already experienced in doing that work and using their power. When the primary��ballots come in the mail for the June election, I will be filling out the bubble next to David Seligman’s name for attorney general. He’s the only one with experience actually defending people from fanatical immigration enforcement and going after state and federal agencies that violate our rights.

He’s sued over the immigrant detention facility in Aurora, stopped the state from sending our personal data to ICE, and been on the ground, side by side with people who are suffering the worst from these injustices for years, not because he’s running for office but because he knows it����ap the right thing to do. I hope you will join me on June 30 in voting for Seligman for attorney general.

Christine Soto,��Denver

Phil Weiser for governor; Bennet to remain in U.S. Senate

While watching the race for governor in Colorado, I am struck by the performances of the two Democratic candidates, Sen. Michael Bennet and Attorney General Phil Weiser. In the forums where they appeared together, the senator, surprisingly, came off as defensive and almost argumentative, while the attorney general was calm and thoughtful in providing specifics about his plans for leading Colorado. Those areas included housing, education, water rights, the economy, public safety, etc. I felt that Weiser showed that he has the experience and expertise to execute good policies, having done that in his capacity as attorney general.

Meanwhile, Sen. Bennet has a term of office to finish. The outlook for Democrats to take the House as well as the Senate in the upcoming midterms has shifted in their favor lately and should only get better in light of inflation, an unpopular war, and decreasing approval of the current administration and Republicans in Congress.

Squandering his Senate seniority and experience at this time, combined with his decision to appoint a newbie to replace him, should that opportunity arise, seems misguided at best and selfish at worst. His strength is writing policy, not executing it. We need Bennet to stay in the Senate and use his legislative expertise for the benefit of Colorado. That’s what we elected him to do.

Kim Creadick, 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.

The condemnations were swift, with some officials saying the decision undercut the integrity of the nation’s elections. Outcry came mostly from Polis’ fellow Democrats, who had roundly urged and pleaded with the governor not to interfere with the prison sentence for the former Mesa County clerk, but also from a coalition of county clerks.

Word of the impending decision had begun to travel earlier in the day Friday, and by the time Polis’ office released a statement that included Peters on a list of other commutations, an array of officials had readied blistering reactions.

The Colorado County Clerks Association wrote that the state’s election officials were “furious, disgusted and deeply disappointed by the governor’s decision.”

“This is now Gov. Polis’s legacy,” the clerks’ association wrote. “He will not be able to run from it or redefine it later. When given the opportunity to stand firmly for the rule of law, for the integrity of Colorado’s elections, and for the public servants who defend them, he chose a different path. This decision is shameful.”

Shad Murib, the chair of the Colorado Democratic Party, said the commutation “sends a message to future bad actors that election tampering has consequences, unless you’re friends with the president.” The Democratic leadership of the state House and Senate wrote that they “strongly opposed” Polis’ move. The leaders of the Colorado AFL-CIO and Colorado WINS, which represents state employees, both condemned Polis’ decision in separate statements.

And U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper said Polis’ action sent the wrong message, writing in a statement:��“Tina Peters is guilty as sin and a disgrace to Colorado.”

Polis, who is in his final year in office after two terms, announced that Peters would be released on June 1. She has been incarcerated since October 2024, but the Colorado Court of Appeals threw out her more than eight-year prison sentence last month. She had not yet been resentenced.

Some Colorado elected officials praised Polis’ decision.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert, a Republican who has long defended Peters, wrote : “(Gov.) Polis and I have had many conversations regarding Tina’s unjust punishment and her release. My heart was filled with joy when he called me today to share this great news!”

Republican state Rep. Scott Bottoms, who is running for governor, wrote on social media that Polis “did the right thing” by commuting Peters’ sentence. If elected, he pledged to give Peters a full pardon.

State Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, another Republican running for governor, said Polis’ action might have been premature.

“The court process was still ongoing,” she said, “and I believe this matter would have been best handled through the judicial system rather than through executive action. I would have preferred to allow the judicial process, under which the trial judge has been ordered by the appeals court to revisit his sentencing of Ms. Peters, to run its course before considering a commutation.”

The League of Women Voters of Colorado, in a statement, said Peters was “not a sympathetic figure caught in a legal gray area.”

“Coloradans take election security seriously because it matters,” the group said. “Our elections are administered by dedicated, nonpartisan officials who work with integrity and professionalism to ensure that every vote is cast and counted lawfully. Governor Polis’s decision diminishes the weight of their work and sends a troubling message: that the consequences for betraying the public trust can be negotiated away.”

In an interview Friday, Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, accused Polis of bowing to Trump, who has repeatedly called for Peters’ release and has taken several punitive actions against the state in recent months.

“We’re just seeing a lot of favors curried to lawlessness, and what I worry about is, in a time where the federal justice system is crippled through this corrupt federal administration, our state judicial system has to work,” Griswold said. “There has to be some checks to lawlessness.”

Sen. Katie Wallace, a Longmont Democrat who’d organized a March letter from lawmakers urging Polis not to touch Peters’ sentence, said that the governor’s decision amounted to “wanton disregard for the safety of our elections.”

“He’s doing it before her new sentence is even given again,” Wallace said. “The courts are under an order to resentence Tina Peters, and he doesn’t know what he’s forgiving.”

Every Democratic lawmaker in the state legislature signed the letter, and some had privately discussed voting to censure Polis if he altered Peters’ sentence. But the legislative session ended Wednesday, ending lawmakers’ ability to consider a formal condemnation.

“It feels very intentional, his timing, and we resent that because we are a co-equal branch of government here,” Wallace said. She acknowledged that Polis had pardon and commutation powers outside of the other branches of state government, but she said his timing was “nefarious.”

The Democratic candidates vying to succeed Polis, Attorney General Phil Weiser and U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, both criticized the decision. Weiser called the move “mind-boggling and wrong as a matter of basic justice.”

Sen. Cleave Simpson, the state Senate’s top Republican, issued a careful statement Friday that refrained from praising or criticizing Polis.

“As Republicans, we support the rule of law, due process, and accountability,” he wrote. “We recognize that many Americans remain concerned about election trust and government response. Listening to these concerns is essential.”

At least one high-ranking elected official appeared pleased with Polis’ decision: In a social media post Friday afternoon, Trump wrote, “FREE TINA!”

In a letter to Peters, Polis wrote that she will “be released on parole effective June 1, 2026” — in just over two weeks.

The commutation, which was announced in a group of 44 clemency actions Friday afternoon, reduced Peters’ original sentence of nearly nine years, which was thrown out last month, to about 4.5 years. Polis’ action, coming after more than a year of pressure from President Donald Trump — and several actions taken targeting the state — risked the appearance that he was bending to Trump’s demands. But in an interview with The Denver Post ahead of the announcement, the governor was resolute.

Peters, the former Mesa County clerk, has been a public supporter of election conspiracies rooted in Trump’s reelection loss in 2020. But Polis said that “just because somebody believes the Earth is flat — just because somebody believes in conspiracy theories — does not mean that they should receive a harsher sentence for a very specific crime.”

Polis’ action drew swift reaction from other elected Democrats. Attorney General Phil Weiser, in an interview, called the commutation “an insult,” “mind-boggling” and “a threat to the rule of law.” And Secretary of State Jena Griswold called Polis’ decision “an affront to democracy” and accused the governor of “selling out our state justice system to cave to a vengeful president.”

Griswold, the state’s top elections official, said in an interview that she’d had one conversation with Polis about his decision — and it occurred at 2 p.m. Friday, less than an hour before the news broke.

“It tells a lawless president that if he pushes hard enough, he’ll get his way,” she said. “And that is dangerous for the rule of law.”

Polis’ action also drew condemnation from the Colorado County Clerks Association, which said in a statement: “We are furious, disgusted, and deeply disappointed by the Governor’s decision. We have met with him privately to make our position unmistakably clear: Tina Peters deserves the accountability imposed through Colorado’s judicial system, and the Governor should, at the very least, respect that process and allow it to fully play out before intervening.”

Trump, for his part, quickly on his platform Truth Social: “FREE TINA!”

Last month, the Colorado Court of Appeals reversed Peters’ eight-year prison term, which was part of an overall nine-year sentence, and ordered a Mesa County judge to resentence her. But that hasn’t yet happened, and Peters’ attorneys also still have time to further appeal her convictions.

Peters, 70, has been serving her sentence since October 2024. She would’ve been eligible for parole in late 2028 under her original sentence — notwithstanding the appeals court’s reversal.

Griswold noted that, following Trump’s mass pardoning of Jan. 6 rioters last year, Peters was among the few people still serving prison time for crimes related to election interference and conspiracies. Her release had been a key priority for those who still back Trump’s baseless election claims, with Peters and her supporters repeatedly referring to her as a political prisoner and as a whistleblower.

For months, Polis had publicly hinted that he would reduce Peters’ sentence. On Friday, Polis quoted from the recent appeals court’s decision, which said Peters’ original sentence was wrongly based on her exercise of protected free speech, to defend his clemency decision.

She will remain a felon under the commutation, and Polis argued that even her shortened sentence was harsher than what her co-defendants received — just not unduly harsh.

While Peters has not publicly shown contrition for her crimes, Polis said she did so in her clemency application. His office previously denied a public records request for that application.

“It’s important to get past our emotions, which I share, about election conspiracy theories,” Polis said. “I condemn them. I condemn any acts of threats or violence against our incredibly talented election workers on both sides of the aisle.

“And it’s important to look at, as we do in any case, the facts of the case — and make sure that we live in a society that upholds the value of freedom of speech, and that even when somebody holds incorrect and unpopular opinions, that speech is not held against them in a sentencing.”

Dan Rubinstein, the Mesa County district attorney who prosecuted Peters, called Polis’ decision arrogant and “irresponsible.” He also questioned the timing of the decision, given that the district court judge had not yet issued a new sentence for Peters.

“That process was still underway, yet the Governor chose to substitute his judgment for the courts, the sentencing judge, and the Mesa County community that bore the consequences of Ms. Peters’ actions,” Rubinstein, a Republican, said in a statement. “It is especially troubling that notoriety, political pressure and powerful allies appear to have produced special treatment that ordinary defendants would never receive.”

Three legal experts also told The Post that the timing of Polis’ decision was odd, with resentencing still pending. These industry-watchers said they could not think of another state-level case in which someone was given clemency in the middle of such proceedings.

To Jonathon J. Booth, an associate professor of law at the University of Colorado, the governor’s actions can best be compared to Trump pardoning the Jan. 6 insurrectionists for their roles in the 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

“We have a choice whether we want to punish these actions harshly or not,” he said. “It seems Polis and Trump are on the same side of that question.”

‘I made mistakes,’ Peters says

After the commutation was announced, a statement by Peters that was posted to social media said: “I made mistakes, and for those I am sorry.”

She acknowledged misleading Griswold, the secretary of state, to give another person unauthorized access to county voting equipment, and she promised “to avoid the mistakes of the past.”

“Upon release, I plan to do my best through legal means to support election integrity and based on my own personal experiences to elevate the cause of prison reform to help ensure the detention system is more fair and equitable for people of all ages,” Peters wrote.

Directly above her apology on X was a pinned post from March declaring, “SOS Jena deleted election records! This is why the dems don’t want to get rid of the machines and pass the Save America Act! This is why they won’t turn over the voter data! They cheat and Tina Peters caught them!”

A jury found Peters guilty in August 2024 of providing a person outside the clerk’s office — who was affiliated with noted election-denier Mike Lindell — with access to Mesa County’s voting systems after the 2020 election, as part of Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud.

The former clerk was convicted of three counts of attempting to influence a public servant, one count of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failing to comply with the secretary of state.

Polis’ decision comes two days after the annual state legislative session adjourned — meaning that the governor appeared to have timed the commutation for when Democratic lawmakers, who had blasted him for even considering intervening, could no longer take any action to formally condemn him. Polis is term-limited, so lawmakers will not convene for another regular session until after he has left office.

‘Gov. Polis’ legacy’? Colorado officials blast Tina Peters sentence reduction, resulting in release soon

Lawmakers sent the governor a letter in March, urging him not to release Peters early, and some had discussed holding a formal vote to censure him if he went ahead with commuting or pardoning the former clerk. Some lawmakers were told Friday morning that Polis planned to make an announcement about Peters' sentence later in the day.

"This is a slap in the face to everyone who actually cares about election integrity and an independent judiciary," Rep. Steven Woodrow, a Denver Democrat, said Friday afternoon after Polis' announcement. "The governor should be ashamed. He cowered to bullies and our democracy is weaker today as a result."

The commutation was also apparently not communicated well in advance to various outside officials, including Rubinstein.

Matt Crane, the executive director of the clerks association, said Polis' office "went dark" on Thursday afternoon as rumors began to spread about impending action. Polis finally called shortly after 2 p.m. Friday for a brief conversation, he said, before hanging up to make a public appearance.

"It����ap incredibly discouraging when he’s more worried about the optics and legacy and interviewing with reporters, rather than the stakeholders who are going to be impacted most," Crane said. He added that he'd "heard from some clerks who've questioned: 'If nobody is going to have our backs, and we’re in this alone, why should we keep doing it?' "

Polis said Friday that "my judgment is not based on what I hear from other people," whether it was from people who wanted Peters' sentence upheld, lessened or wiped away. That included the Republican president, who has claimed to pardon Peters -- a power he does not have for state-level convictions -- and who said on New Year's Eve that he hoped Polis and others would "rot in hell" for Peters' sentence.

Around that same time, Polis' office sought input on Peters' clemency application from District Court Judge Matthew Barrett, who sentenced Peters. In a Jan. 13 letter to the governor obtained by The Post, Barrett wrote that Polis' chief legal counsel had spoken with him about the application, . Barrett wrote that he had "carefully considered" Peters' personal circumstances before sentencing her, as well as "her lack of accountability."

"I chose a sentence in roughly the midpoint of the presumptive ranges that this state's General Assembly has set," the judge wrote.

He told the governor that he would respect whatever decision Polis made and that he trusted any decision would be made "for the right reasons."

"I'm hopeful that my decision today will restore the confidence that the people of Colorado have that, regardless of their political opinions or beliefs, they will receive equal justice under the law," Polis said Friday.

The initial response from high-level officials went in the opposite direction.

At a debate earlier this month, both Democrats hoping to succeed Polis in the governor's office -- Weiser and U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet -- agreed that Peters' original sentence was appropriate. In a statement after the news broke Friday, Bennet said he "vehemently disagrees" with the commutation.

"Lawlessness only breeds more lawlessness," Bennet said. "With President Trump continuing to attack Colorado, we must do everything we can to stand strong for our institutions and the rule of law.”

Weiser said the governor gave him a short heads-up that he had made his decision. About 30 minutes after the news was public, Weiser said he was still "somewhat in shock that it actually happened."

Decision announced with other actions

Polis announced Peters' commutation as part of a slate of clemency decisions on Friday. In addition to Peters, Polis commuted the sentences of eight other inmates, including people who had been sentenced to life in prison without parole for murder charges, and pardoned 35 people.

One of these individuals, Brandin Eugene Kreuzer, will be released on parole June 1 after serving 15 years of a 50-year sentence following a 2010 conviction for shooting a Douglas County deputy during a monthlong crime spree.

Polis also commuted the sentence of Matthew Aldaz, who sued the governor in 2020 over allegations that COVID-19 posed a significant health risk behind bars. Aldaz had served 13 years in prison for second-degree murder. He will be released on parole June 1.

Polis has typically announced commutations and pardons around the holidays at the end of each year, which he did not do in December amid renewed pressure from the Trump administration.

He says he is still reviewing other clemency applications and plans to announce others before he leaves office in January.

Despite the intense public and private pressure and months of open consideration for granting Peters clemency, Polis said other commutations, particularly those in cases involving the loss of life, were much harder decisions.

In the 19 months��since she was sentenced, neither Peters nor her legal team had shown any contrition publicly -- at least before Friday -- for the conduct that led to her felony convictions. Indeed, just last week, her supporters , in which she calls herself a political prisoner and repeats election conspiracy theories.

Peters received at least four negative write-ups during her first year in prison. In January, surveillance footage showed Peters grabbing and shoving a fellow inmate during a brief scuffle in a prison common area. Peters was later found not guilty of assault but was found guilty of a lesser charge.

As he has faced pressure from the president, Polis has said he would not release Peters as part of any sort of deal with the Trump administration. Other officials, including Bennet, have accused Trump of retaliating against the state for its refusal to release Peters.

Since last fall, federal officials announced the dismantling of Boulder's National Center for Atmospheric Research, while Trump vetoed a bipartisan bill to help pay for a water pipeline in southeastern Colorado, and his administration halted and stripped federal funding for state programs.

Federal officials have also threatened to undercut the state's wolf reintroduction program, hampering an effort that's been embraced by Polis' husband, Marlon Reis.

It was unclear if Polis' commutation decision would ease or reverse any of those moves. A request for comment sent to the White House on Friday was met with a simple response: a link to Trump's brief pro-Peters Truth Social post.

Both candidates are current elected members of the legislature. Throughout the debate, Bottoms, who has been a state representative for Colorado Springs since 2023, repeatedly referred to concerns about pedophilia rings but then said he had no way to back up his claims.

“The FBI is checking into all of that,” he said. “There’s no way I can prove this right now because I’m not a federal investigator … but we’ll see.”

Kirkmeyer of Brighton has served in the state Senate since 2020 and has been on the influential Joint Budget Committee since 2022. She leaned heavily on that experience throughout her responses Thursday.

“I’m the better candidate because I have the most experience and I’m qualified and I know how to get the job done,” she said. “I actually govern and run a multibillion-dollar budget in this state.”

During her time in the Democratic-majority legislature, she has, at times, reached across the aisle for policy-making. She during the 2026 legislative session, which ended Wednesday. Many of them were the product of the budget committee’s work and, in keeping with how that body works, included at least one Democratic sponsor.

“You have to work across the aisle to get anything done,” she said.

Bottoms is the lead pastor at the Church at Briargate, a Colorado Springs evangelical church. Bottoms is one of the most conservative members of the legislature. In four years in the Capitol, he has been the primary sponsor on one bill that became law — This year, he had no Democratic co-sponsors on the , and he was the sole representative on four of them. They focused on topics like restricting abortion access and gender-affirming care for minors. His fellow legislators rejected almost all of them after their first committee meetings.

“I don’t shy away from the scary kind of issues,” he said. “I’ve tried to pass many bills that have specifically to do with that leadership, grooming our kids, trafficking kids, parental consent, pedophilia.”

The debate was sponsored by The Denver Post, Denver7 and Colorado Public Radio. Last week, the same outlets also hosted a debate for Democratic candidates Attorney General Phil Weiser and U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet.

Kirkmeyer, Bottoms or Victor Marx, a third candidate who didn’t participate in the debate Thursday, will take on Bennet or Weiser in the general election. The odds are unlikely that a Republican candidate will win that race, as the state has become increasingly blue in recent years. Gov. Jared Polis defeated Heidi Ganahl by more than 19 percentage points in 2022.

Still, the winner of the Republican primary is significant, in that the victor will show what direction the state’s minority party is headed. The Colorado GOP has had years of upheaval as its members have fought over what direction to take next.

Unaffiliated voters’ participation in primaries

A major point of contention for the state Republican Party has been whether unaffiliated voters should be allowed to participate in the party’s primaries. The candidates disagreed about that issue, among several others, during the debate Thursday.

Bottoms, who filed a lawsuit this month to block the unaffiliated voters said he believes the change would keep the system in line with the Constitution.

Kirkmeyer, who unsuccessfully ran to represent Colorado’s 8th Congressional District in 2022, said she wouldn’t support blocking unaffiliated voters because it would alienate unaffiliated and Republican voters and force the state to use only the caucuses — a system she said many voters aren’t familiar with.

The candidates also disagreed about whether the state’s voting system is secure. Kirkmeyer said she believes the system may need some new rules, like ID requirements, and that voter rolls should be cleaned up. But overall, she said, she believes it is secure. Bottoms said he wants to see lots of changes, including ending the state’s mail-in voting system and requiring IDs to vote.

Alignment with Trump

When moderators asked the candidates how they would differentiate themselves from Trump, the candidates took different approaches. Kirkmeyer said she disagrees with some of the president’s decisions that have impacted Colorado, like declining requests for disaster relief dollars and removing the Space Force headquarters from the state. She added that she would try to find ways to work with the president and remind him “we are all his constituents as well.”

Bottoms praised the president’s work but said he isn’t afraid to stand up to him if he doesn’t agree with his decisions.

“I’m a reformer. I do not mind looking at people in power,” he said.

Kirkmeyer and Bottoms mostly focused on their own experience and opinions throughout the debate but a few times directly clashed with one another. When discussing the state budget, Bottoms posited that widespread corruption is costing the state billions of dollars, adding that if he were elected he would “DOGE” all the departments — referring to the now-disbanded Department of Government Efficiency.

“We have hundreds of millions of dollars right now that are going to illegal immigrant abortions and transgender surgeries,” he said.

Kirkmeyer said his comments were untrue and asked him to directly point to where those items are in the budget. He didn’t directly answer.

“Pretty much everything Rep. Bottoms said is inaccurate,” she said to one of his responses.

The candidates disagreed about whether former President Joe Biden won the 2020 election. Bottoms said no while Kirkmeyer said yes. Both said Trump isn’t eligible to run for another term.

Bottoms secured the top spot on the primary ballot after he won the most support during the party’s state assembly in April. He won 45% of the 2,145 delegates present, with Marx coming in second. Kirkmeyer landed on the ballot through a signature-gathering process.

The primary will be June 30. The general election will be Nov. 3.

The third candidate on the Republican primary ballot, Victor Marx, didn’t attend but hosted his own livestream at the same time.

In their longest appearance together as competing candidates, the two men threw familiar pitches: Weiser touted the 64 lawsuits he has joined or filed against the Trump administration and the money those legal efforts have returned to the state. Bennet criticized the pressing affordabilty crisis that continues to plague Colorado and, in an oft-repeated line, he said the state’s leaders needed to “color outside the lines” to address it.

They also hit each other with familiar attacks, with Weiser opening the hour-long debate with a swipe at Bennet for voting for some of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees and arguing that the state’s senior senator should stay in Congress.

“This campaign comes down to a choice,” Weiser said. “The candidate of Colorado or the candidate who is from the Washington, D.C. establishment.”

Bennet initially sidestepped Weiser’s jabs, joking at one point that he was “grateful that Phil Weiser has become such a fan of my Senate service.” He later said that Weiser’s lawsuits against the Trump administration were political and were filed “later in your second administration.”

“I would say with respect to Phil’s observation about his closeness to being an insider in the state government,” Bennet said, “I’m speaking as a citizen of Colorado — I don’t think the state government has done very much to solve our housing crisis, to solve our childcare crisis, to solve our healthcare crisis, to solve the fact that for the first time in a generation, businesses are moving out of our state because they can’t succeed as well in Colorado.”

When given the opportunity to ask each other a question, Weiser criticized Bennet for his Cabinet votes. Bennet said he regretted voting for Energy Secretary Chris Wright but that he voted for Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins because the state needed support on wildfires. Bennet then pressed Weiser for saying he would take Trump’s first administration back “in a heartbeat”; Weiser agreed that Trump’s first term was “lawless” but that the president’s current administration is even worse.

The debate was an opportunity for Weiser, who polling has shown is less well-known than Bennet, to curb the gap in name recognition and highlight his ties to the state and his efforts to resist Trump.

“If you try to take away our rights, if you harm us, you’re going to have to go through me,” Weiser said.

Bennet, meanwhile, pressed his criticism of the disappearing American dream in Colorado and his belief that he would better positioned to fight “the battle for America” in Denver than in D.C.

If elected governor, Bennet will also select his own replacement in the Senate. He said he didn’t have a replacement shortlist, and he wouldn’t commit to providing any possible candidates to voters before primary ballots were mailed next month.

But when it came to policy questions, the two men frequently agreed. The debate was sponsored by The Denver Post, Denver7 and Colorado Public Radio, and the first question asked Bennet and Weiser to identify a policy position that separated them. They used that opportunity to offer introductory remarks. And when CPR’s Ryan Warner pushed them for an answer, Weiser said he had published policy plans on water and public safety and Bennet hadn’t. Bennet said he wanted to address affordability concerns while Weiser was focused on attacking his record.

Both said they were skeptical of overturning a state law that prevents municipalities from enacting rent control. Both supported expanding Peña Boulevard and called for “guardrails” around the use of license-plate-reader technology.

On six yes-or-no questions, they offered identical answers: Both supported efforts to redraw the state’s congressional map before the 2028 election, each said Colorado should lean more on nuclear energy, and they agreed that that state should exempt education funding from the state’s spending cap.

In shots at their would-be predecessor Gov. Jared Polis, both candidates said Tina Peters’ sentence wasn’t harsh and that they wouldn’t support the state’s “current path” of building more housing by leapfrogging local control.

(They also each said they wouldn’t wear a suit with sneakers, a below-the-ankle swipe at Polis’ fashion choices.)

The two men are looking to replace Polis, who is term-limited and will leave office early next year. Given Colorado’s decidedly blue hue, whoever wins the Democratic primary will be in pole position to next occupy the governor’s mansion. The next governor will find mixed fortunes: The state has significant — and unresolved — structural budget issues, with more Medicaid cuts on the near horizon.

Asked about the growth of Medicaid spending in the state, Bennet took another whack at Polis: “I don’t believe the current administration has done a very good job of administering Medicaid.” He called for “dramatically transforming” how the program works here.

On the other hand, a Gov. Weiser or Gov. Bennet almost certainly would be greeted by strong Democratic majorities in the state Capitol. As Polis has discovered, firm Democratic control doesn’t translate into a unified vision for the state. Still, it provides a smoother runway for a Democratic governor’s policy agenda — especially in a legislature that is looking to reset its relationship with the governor’s office.

On that front, Weiser highlighted his collaboration with other state officials and said he would sign a social media regulation bill that Polis vetoed last year; the measure would’ve required the platforms to better police themselves and ban users who violate either their terms of services or state law.

The primary election will be June 30. The Post, Denver7 and CPR will host another debate on May 14 for Republican gubernatorial candidates Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer and Rep. Scott Bottoms. A third candidate, Victor Marx, declined to participate.

��

The new lawsuit alleges that Colorado’s ban on ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds violates the Second Amendment’s right for citizens to keep and bear arms. It argues that such magazines are standard for many weapons.

“Law-abiding Americans own and use for lawful purposes literally hundreds of millions of magazines such as those banned by the State,” the complaint reads. “A detachable magazine is an integral part of most semi-automatic firearms, including the AR-15 rifle. As such, they are covered by the Second Amendment����ap right to keep and bear arms.”

Attorney General Phil Weiser vowed to defend the ban in a statement Wednesday, reiterating a stance he and other state and local officials took when the DOJ first threatened the lawsuits against Denver and the state earlier this week.

“Using federal civil rights law to put Coloradans at greater risk of gun violence is a dangerous overreach by the Justice Department, and this lawsuit turns the mission of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division on its head,” Weiser said in the statement. “Large-capacity magazine laws are responsible policies that satisfy Second Amendment protections, decrease the deadly impacts of mass shootings, and save lives.”

The Colorado Supreme Court upheld the state’s ban on large-capacity magazines in 2020, finding that the prohibition did not violate residents’ right to bear arms as guaranteed by the state Constitution. The decision did not consider whether the ban violated the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

State lawmakers passed the ban in 2013 in the wake of the Aurora movie theater shooting the prior year, in which the gunman used a large-capacity magazine to fire more than 60 rounds in less than a minute, killing 12 and wounding dozens.

Attorney General Phil Weiser, meanwhile, still can tout the strongest direct support among the two Democrats when it comes to contributions to their own campaigns. On the Republican side, Colorado Springs pastor Victor Marx has amassed by far the largest war chest among the three contenders in the June 30 primary.

New campaign finance reports filed by a Monday deadline shed light on recent fundraising by and in support of candidates for state offices in this year’s elections. The reports cover donations and expenses from Jan. 1 through April 29.

The total amount contributed by Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor, to an independent expenditure committee supporting Bennet accounts for nearly a quarter of the $10.5 million that has gone to support Bennet either directly or indirectly. Brighter Future for Colorado, a dark-money group that does not need to disclose its donors as a nonprofit, has contributed another $1 million to the independent committee, according to campaign finance records.

Collectively, that $3.5 million from Bloomberg and the nonprofit helps give Bennet a commanding financial lead over Weiser.

Weiser has raised about $5.9 million directly through his campaign, including nearly $1.4 million during the latest reporting period, while another $1 million has gone to the independent expenditure committee supporting him.

Bennet has raised $4.4 million directly, about $974,000 of which arrived in the recent reporting period. The remaining $6.1 million has gone to the outside committee supporting him.��

The independent expenditure committees can raise unlimited sums, including from organizations that don’t disclose their donors, compared to the $1,450-per-individual limit on direct campaign contributions to candidates.

The independent committees are prohibited from coordinating with candidates.

“Our campaign is powered by the people of Colorado — not out-of-state billionaires, big corporations, or dark money,” Weiser said in a statement this week. He characterized his campaign as being “fueled by unprecedented grassroots support” and Bennet’s as “an establishment, Washington, D.C., campaign.”

Weiser, who has ramped up TV ad buys in recent weeks to boost his name ID, entered the final two months of the primary campaign with about $2.7 million in the bank. The committee supporting him, Fighting for Colorado, had about $961,000 left.

Bennet reported about $1.2 million left in his campaign coffers. The committee supporting him, Rocky Mountain Way, had about $4.6 million in the bank.

“With only two months until Election Day, Coloradans are rallying behind Michael’s vision for a better, stronger Colorado,” Bennet’s campaign manager, Nellie Moran, said in a statement. She added that Bennet “has the experience and the guts to make the hard decisions and tackle our cost-of-living crisis head-on.”

GOP race for governor

In the race for the Republican nomination for governor, Marx continues to substantially outraise his competitors.

He reported raising nearly $1.7 million in the first four months of 2026 — more than 10 times what the next-most-monied GOP candidate, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, reported raising and the single largest haul of the reporting period.

Marx has reported raising nearly $2.3 million total in his pursuit of the Republican nomination. Kirkmeyer has reported raising about $510,000 total this election cycle, with about $128,000 coming in the most recent period.

Kirkmeyer, who is one of the most powerful elected Republicans in the state as a member of the legislature’s Joint Budget Committee, and Marx, a political newcomer, have each spent a considerable chunk of their cash already. Marx entered the final stretch before the June 30 primary with about $530,000 in the bank, while Kirkmeyer had about $93,000.

State Rep. Scott Bottoms, who won the Republican state assembly last month and will get the top line on the ballot, has reported total fundraising of about $179,000, of which $68,000 was raised in the latest fundraising period. He had about $8,000 in the bank.

Other constitutional offices

Besides the governor’s race, Colorado’s other three state constitutional offices are open races this year as the incumbents run up against term limits.

In the attorney general’s race, Democrat Jena Griswold continues to outpace her competition. Griswold, the current secretary of state, has raised $1.8 million total, including $340,000 in the latest period. She reported more than $1 million in the bank.

None of her competitors for the party’s nomination — Hetal Doshi, David Seligman and Boulder District Attorney Michael Dougherty — have reported raising more than $1 million total this campaign. In the most recent period, though, all three raised more than $100,000 in donations. Dougherty, who raised more than $230,000 in contributions, also loaned his campaign $154,665.

Republican attorney general candidate Michael Allen, the Colorado Springs district attorney who entered the race in January, has reported raising about $163,000 total, while David Willson, a more recent GOP entrant, has raised $1,165.

In the secretary of state’s race, state Sen. Jessie Danielson has pulled ahead of Jefferson County Clerk Amanda Gonzalez in fundraising as they seek the Democratic nomination. Danielson reported raising almost $305,000 this cycle, to Gonzalez’s $184,000.

The sole Republican candidate for secretary of state, James Wiley, has not reported raising any money.

In the treasurer’s race, Democratic state Sen. Jeff Bridges has reported raising about $393,000 total. Fremont County Commissioner Kevin Grantham, a Republican, has reported raising about $84,000. The two men are running unopposed for their parties’ nominations.

Updated (on May 7, 2026): Information about fundraising in the Colorado attorney general’s race was updated to note that Michael Dougherty made a loan to his campaign.