Guest Column – Vote NO: Proposition 133 is a dangerous trap

The opinions, beliefs, and points of view expressed by our guest columnists do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and points of view of this publication.

IT HARMS SURVIVORS AND HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS

Karen Middleton

President, Cobalt Advocates

Haga click aquí para leer la versión en español

Colorado voters will soon decide on Proposition 133. While framed as a straightforward response to child sex trafficking, its reality is far more complex and dangerous. Proposition 133 falsely claims to protect children and deter human trafficking, but in reality, it harms victims and gives traffickers another tool to exploit them.

Colorado’s leading anti-sexual violence organizations—including CCASA, COVA, and Violence Free Colorado—oppose Proposition 133 due to the severe risks it poses to trafficking survivors. Because trafficking relies heavily on coercion, victims are often forced to collect money, recruit others, or facilitate encounters. Under this measure, an unsuccessful coercion defense would result in mandatory life without parole, punishing the exploited alongside the exploiters.

Vote NO: Proposition 133 is a dangerous trap

Mandating a life sentence without parole for sex trafficking-related charges removes critical judicial discretion. This puts trafficking victims who have already experienced profound trauma at risk of spending their lives in prison for acts they were forced or coerced to commit. Prop 133 ultimately treats victims the same as their perpetrators.

Colorado already treats the human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude as a serious felony. Proposition 133, however, goes much further. It mandates life in prison without parole and introduces vague statutory language making it trafficking to knowingly trade anything of monetary value to buy or sell sexual activity with a minor.

Although the measure does not explicitly mention abortion, organizations like Cobalt warn that anti-abortion activists could attempt to weaponize this language against those helping a minor obtain legal abortion care in Colorado. This includes family members paying for care, medical providers, or support organizations providing transportation and lodging. The political groups behind this measure have a documented record of opposing abortion rights. Even if these arguments fail in court, the mere threat of a mandatory life sentence could intimidate individuals, causing delays that effectively deny access to time-sensitive care.

Vote NO: Proposition 133 is a dangerous trap

A law does not have to result in successful conviction to cause harm. We all know how threats are being used against vulnerable communities in Colorado, especially immigrant communities, to cause harm.

Colorado can impose serious consequences for trafficking while also protecting survivors, preserving judicial discretion, and preventing anti-abortion activists from using criminal law to intimidate people seeking or helping someone obtain legal health care.

Proposition 133 does not do any of those things.

But it does harm people seeking health care and survivor-victims of sexual violence.

Please vote No.