Committee debates Blue Book language on law-enforcement immigration notifications; amendment proposals fail

The Legislative Council considered the staff’s draft Blue Book analysis of Amendment 81, a proposed constitutional amendment that would require state and local law enforcement to attempt to determine whether people charged with certain crimes are lawfully present and to notify the U.S. Department of Homeland Security within 72 hours in specified cases. Brendan Fung, the legislative council analyst who led the writing team, summarized the measure’s mechanics and the arguments for and against it.

"Amendment 81 is a constitutional amendment that requires state and local law enforcement to make a reasonable effort to determine whether an individual charged with a crime is lawfully present in The United States, if the charge is for a crime of violence or if the individual has a prior felony conviction," Fung told the committee during the staff presentation. He said the draft Blue Book includes background on who would be subject to the measure, existing law on communication with federal immigration authorities, and a fiscal-impact overview.

Public commenters questioned whether the Blue Book and the draft language adequately described due‑process concerns and whether naming specific agencies (for example, ICE) was appropriate in the analysis. Ariane Frosh, policy counsel at the ACLU of Colorado, asked the committee to emphasize due‑process risks and cautioned that the draft’s arguments could conflate criminal‑justice processes with civil immigration enforcement. "We would have liked to see more attention paid to the due process arguments," Frosh said during public testimony.

Committee members proposed two separate amendments to the draft Blue Book language intended to clarify which federal entities might be contacted and to echo opponents’ public messaging. The first amendment was moved and seconded; after discussion the roll call returned a result of 11 to 7 against adoption. Representative Martinez later offered a similar clarifying amendment focused on the measure’s potential to expand ICE presence; that amendment also failed on an 11 to 7 committee vote.

Staff explained their decision not to include the acronym ICE in the Blue Book summary: the measure’s text refers to the Department of Homeland Security broadly, and Legislative Council staff said they limited the summary to the text’s language rather than extrapolating which DHS component would act. The committee concluded its review of Amendment 81 after the amendment phase and no final vote on the measure itself was taken by the committee — the Blue Book review procedure votes only on proposed edits to the book, not the ballot measures.

The committee moves on to additional measures; legislative staff will incorporate the committee’s direction into the final Blue Book that is slated for printing and distribution ahead of constitutional deadlines.