Proposition 133 could punish trafficking victims and harm reproductive health access

With ballots now arriving in mailboxes, Coloradans will decide on the deceptive Proposition 133, a measure titled “Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor.” Despite its title, the measure could punish victims for crimes they were forced or coerced to commit, make survivors less likely to seek help, and create new concerns about access to legally protected healthcare.

Organizations like the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault that work directly with survivors of sexual violence and human trafficking are raising the alarm about the dangers of Proposition 133. No Colorado organization that works on sexual violence or human trafficking was consulted on this measure, and almost all of them oppose it, including the Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking, Colorado Organization for Victim Assistance, Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network, Rocky Mountain Victim Law Center and the Rose Andom Center.

Colorado already treats child sex trafficking as a serious felony, punishable by eight to 48 years in prison per offense, followed by mandatory parole. Proposition 133 would replace those penalties with life imprisonment without parole, undermining judicial discretion, and expand the conduct covered by the law, potentially harming legally protected health care in our state.

Proposition 133’s deception promises to protect children and deter heinous crimes. A deeper examination reveals a dangerous reality: The measure seeks to add new, vague language to Colorado’s human trafficking statute, criminalizing anyone who “knowingly trades anything of monetary value to buy or sell sexual activity with a minor.” The measure fails to define this language further, creating an ambiguity that is not an accident — it is a political strategy.

Proposition 133 was placed on the ballot by Protect Kids Colorado, an anti-abortion rights network also advancing Propositions 134 and 135 to target transgender students and gender-affirming care. The campaign’s own materials promote all three measures as part of a shared agenda. It’s also supported by the Heritage Foundation, the authors of Project 2025.

Leaders of this network have publicly characterized state protections for interstate healthcare travel as facilitating the “trafficking” of children. Because Colorado has become a critical access point for reproductive and gender-affirming healthcare in the region, this poorly defined trafficking language creates a direct risk.

Anti-abortion activists could attempt to weaponize this provision against anyone helping a minor obtain legal abortion care — including medical providers, parents, or support organizations providing transportation, lodging, or funding. A law does not need to result in a successful court conviction to cause profound harm. The mere threat of prosecution creates an ambiguity that causes families and providers to hesitate, severely reducing healthcare access through sheer intimidation.

While the measure creates a backdoor tool for political activists, its explicit mandates inflict immediate trauma on human trafficking survivors. Proposition 133 falsely claims to protect children, but in reality, it gives traffickers another tool to exploit them.

Traffickers don’t simply target, groom, and exploit victims sexually. They also often force them to recruit other victims, post advertisements, or participate in criminal activity. This is known as forced criminality.

Legally, it is nearly impossible for a victim without resources and legal support to defend themselves by proving they didn’t do something. Proving victimization in a court of law requires extensive documentation that traumatized victims rarely possess since traffickers control every aspect of their lives, including access to technology. Instead of holding institutions and abusers accountable, this extreme measure treats victims the same as their exploiters.

For example, under Proposition 133, an 18-year-old who has been exploited since childhood and coerced into facilitating encounters would face the exact same harsh punishment as their perpetrator. A 14-year-old victim forced by their abuser to recruit another minor could face a mandatory sentence designed for their trafficker before they even turn 18.

Proposition 133 offers the illusion of protection while exposing survivors to new risks, eliminating judicial discretion, and raising serious concerns about the misuse of criminal law against legally protected healthcare.

A ballot measure should be judged by what it actually does, not what its sponsors promise. Proposition 133 fails that test.