Colorado Amendment 81 would require law enforcement to notify DHS about some defendants

A proposed Colorado constitutional amendment would require law enforcement to make reasonable efforts to determine the immigration status of certain people after they are charged with crimes and notify the federal Department of Homeland Security within 72 hours if their status is unknown or they are unlawfully present.

The measure, identified as Initiative 2025-2026 No. 95 in the secretary of state's records and as Amendment 81 by the Legislative Council, would apply to people charged with a Colorado statutory crime of violence or who have a prior felony conviction. The final text filed with the Colorado secretary of state defines "law enforcement" to include certified peace officers employed by law-enforcement agencies, correctional officers, and attorneys or investigators employed by district attorneys.

The measure requires notification to DHS but does not expressly grant immigration-enforcement authority. It does not name U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, authorize an arrest or detention, establish a penalty for noncompliance, or identify which state or local agency or DHS component would handle the notifications.

The Colorado Legislative Council's Amendment 81 page identifies the proposal as a constitutional amendment titled "Law Enforcement Communication with Federal Immigration Authorities." The page lists draft analyses and a final draft packet, but the available record does not provide their contents or direct downloadable links. As of Sept. 4, it does not establish a dollar estimate, staffing projection, system requirements or how implementation costs would be allocated among state agencies, local governments, courts, correctional facilities and federal authorities.

The Legislative Council reviewed proposed Blue Book language Sept. 3 as it prepared the state's 2026 voter information booklet. Members voted on changes to the booklet's analysis, not on the amendment itself, according to the Legislative Council recording.

Public testimony focused on the possibility that federal immigration action could begin after a criminal charge, before a conviction or other adjudication. An ACLU of Colorado representative argued that the measure could expose someone to federal immigration enforcement based on a charge and raised concerns about the lack of a process before the government could affect a person's liberty interests. Opponents also said the requirement could weaken trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement.

Supporters argued that the measure could improve coordination among local, state and federal authorities and assist with the removal of people who are not lawfully present and are accused of violent crimes or have prior felony convictions. Those statements describe potential effects, not quantified projections in the available record.

Two proposed changes to the Blue Book analysis addressed ICE and federal enforcement. One would have referred specifically to ICE and described the measure as involving people suspected of unlawful presence. The other would have said the measure would expand ICE activity or presence in Colorado. Both failed on 11-7 votes.

Legislative Council staff said the measure refers to DHS, not ICE, and that notifying DHS does not necessarily mean ICE would be notified. Staff also said the measure contains a notification requirement rather than an express enforcement provision and declined to say it would necessarily expand ICE activity. Any action by DHS or ICE after receiving a notification would depend on how federal authorities handled the information.

The council's discussion did not produce a final, council-approved version of the Blue Book analysis. The chair said the council votes on proposed amendments to the booklet rather than on each ballot measure. The proposal remains a proposed constitutional amendment for the 2026 ballot.