Colorado Approves Three Child-Focused Measures

Ballot drop box in a parking lot — Photo: Colleen Michaels / Shutterstock

Colorado voters approved three child-focused ballot measures, signaling a direct shift in how the state will police trafficking, school sports, and surgeries for minors.

Story Snapshot

Proposition 133 passed with a large margin and sets life without parole for sex trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude.
Proposition 134 requires school and college sports teams to align eligibility with sex assigned at birth, with specific exceptions.
Proposition 135 bans certain surgeries on minors tied to gender identity but leaves nonsurgical care legal; it passed with about 52% support.
Opponents plan challenges, saying the measures shift family and medical decisions to the state and risk exclusion for some students.

What Voters Approved and by How Much

Unofficial results showed strong backing for Proposition 133 and narrower wins for the sports and surgery measures. Proposition 133, labeled the “Children Are Not for Sale Act,” drew support above 60 percent, according to contemporaneous counts. Proposition 135 passed with about 52.2 percent of the vote, per the Associated Press. The campaign declared a clean sweep for all three measures after Election Day, framing the outcome as a mandate for child protection priorities.

These wins land in a national fight over child safety, gender policies, and parental rights. Voters often feel that elites and agencies dodge hard choices. Here, Coloradans forced clarity at the ballot box. Yet two measures change statutes, not the state constitution. Lawmakers can amend or repeal them with a simple majority, which means the practical durability of 134 and 135 will depend on future legislative sessions and possible court tests.

What Each Measure Does in Plain Terms

Proposition 133 increases the penalty for trafficking a minor for sexual servitude to life in prison without parole. Materials describe a narrow exception for coerced victims who assisted perpetrators, aiming to avoid punishing those forced to help traffickers. Proposition 134 orders schools and colleges to label teams male, female, or coed, and to base eligibility on sex assigned at birth. It allows female athletes to join male teams if no comparable female team exists.

Proposition 135 targets surgeries meant to alter a minor’s biological sex characteristics because of gender identity. The measure lists medical exceptions and does not ban counseling, puberty blockers, or hormone therapy. That design makes it narrower than a total ban on all forms of gender-related care for minors. News coverage and the official ballot packet align on this distinction, even as debate over real-world impacts continues.

Supporters’ Case and Institutional Backing

Supporters said voters endorsed concrete guardrails with clear rules. Religious leaders, including the Colorado Catholic Conference, backed the full slate and framed them as child-protection and family-support measures. Their statement highlighted the trafficking penalty, sports eligibility based on sex, and defined surgery limits for minors. That support linked the campaign to longstanding institutions, not only individual activists or parents, which helped validate the effort for many voters.

Backers also stressed that the campaign met the formal hurdles of signature gathering and ballot access after an earlier failure. Reports noted that conservative religious groups helped propel the second try, reflecting broader frustration with government inaction. Many voters on both left and right distrust state agencies and see direct democracy as a way to break through bureaucratic delay and political gridlock.

Opponents’ Concerns and What Comes Next

Opponents warned that Propositions 134 and 135 move key decisions from families and doctors to the state. The American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado said the sports rule could force invasive sex checks and block students from teams matching their gender identity. The group also said the surgery limits remove health decisions from families and medical experts, and it signaled post-election resistance and possible legal strategies.

Grassroots, Not Money, Won The Ballot Initiatives In Colorado!
Erin Lee, Protect Kids Colorado, fought for three years to protect children from gender ideology and defend girls sports; On November 3rd the efforts of one mom and 5000 plus grassroots volunteers paid off. Three… pic.twitter.com/BTa37i4gWe

— Moms for Liberty (@Moms4Liberty) November 7, 2026

Other critics, including Families Not Politics and One Colorado, said the measures will create barriers to necessary care and exclude some students from full school life. They plan to defend access to health care and participation in activities for transgender youth. Media reports also noted that opponents believe the surgery measure could affect care more broadly than backers claim. Expect court challenges, agency guidance fights, and legislative attempts to revise the statutes.

Why This Matters Beyond Colorado

These votes reflect a larger national struggle over how to set rules when science, fairness, and child protection are contested. Many Americans doubt whether government leaders listen or act. Ballot measures like these let voters set lines when officials stall. Still, implementation gaps remain. Data on the frequency of prior harms in Colorado are thin, and the measures’ effects will turn on rulemaking, school policies, medical practice, and future legislative changes.