Colorado 2026 Regular Session Status: Enacted Bipartisan · 19 D · 5 R cosponsors

SB 85 — Military Protection Orders

Last action — Governor Signed

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed House
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 10, 2026. Enacted.

Signed by Governor Jared Polis (Democratic) on May 05, 2026.

Odds of enactment

High chance

Based on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.

Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.

A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 98% · high confidence
  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 39 sponsors

    4 primary, 35 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Bipartisan support

    Sponsored across 2 parties (19 D · 5 R) — cross-party backing.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 7 recorded votes so far.

Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.

Summary

When a peace officer has reasonable suspicion that a crime of domestic violence has occurred, the peace officer is required to search the national crime information center database to determine whether a military protection order has been issued against one of the parties. If a military protection order has been issued against a party, the peace officer shall notify the military law enforcement agency that entered the protection order into the database.     The act includes the existence of a military protection order as relevant evidence that the court shall consider when determining whether to issue a temporary civil protection order.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

57 added · 66 removed

Plain-language change summary

The latest version of SB 85 has introduced a requirement for law enforcement officers to check for any existing military protection orders when they respond to domestic violence incidents. It also mandates that courts must consider the presence of these military protection orders when deciding whether to issue temporary civil protection orders. This change is significant as it ensures that the specific protections afforded to military personnel are taken into account during domestic violence situations, helping to safeguard both service members and their families.

→
Previous
Latest
NOTE:
SENATE BILL 26-085 BY SENATOR(S) Frizell and Ball, Bridges, Bright, Cutter, Danielson, Exum, Hinrichsen, Jodeh, Kipp, Kirkmeyer, Kolker, Lindstedt, Marchman, Mullica, Pelton R., Roberts, Rodriguez, Simpson, Snyder, Sullivan, Wallace, Weissman, Coleman;
This bill has been prepared for the signatures of the appropriate legislative officers and the Governor.
alsoREPRESENTATIVE(S)Duranand Hartsook,Boesenecker,Caldwell, Clifford, Froelich, Gonzalez R., Jackson, Joseph, Keltie, Lieder, Marshall, Phillips, Rutinel, McCluskie.
To determine whether the Governor has signed the bill or taken other action on it, please consult the legislative status sheet, the legislative history, or the Session Laws.
CONCERNING MILITARY PROTECTION ORDERS, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, A PEACE OFFICER'S DUTY TO DETERMINE WHETHER A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER EXISTS WHEN RESPONDING TO AN INCIDENT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER THE EXISTENCE OF A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER AS RELEVANT EVIDENCE WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER TO ISSUE A TEMPORARY CIVIL PROTECTION ORDER.
SENATE BILL 26-085 BY SENATOR(S) Frizell and Ball, Bridges, Bright, Cutter, Danielson, Exum,Hinrichsen,Jodeh,Kipp,Kirkmeyer,Kolker,Lindstedt,Marchman, Mullica, Pelton R., Roberts, Rodriguez, Simpson, Snyder, Sullivan, Wallace, Weissman, Coleman;
Be it enacted by the General Assembly ofthe State ofColorado:
alsoREPRESENTATIVE(S)DuranandHartsook,Boesenecker,Caldwell, Clifford, Froelich, Gonzalez R., Jackson, Joseph, Keltie, Lieder, Marshall, Phillips, Rutinel, McCluskie.
CONCERNING MILITARY PROTECTION ORDERS , AND , IN CONNECTION THEREWITH ,A PEACE OFFICER S DUTY TO DETERMINE WHETHER A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER EXISTS WHEN RESPONDING TO AN INCIDENT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER THE EXISTENCE OF A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER AS RELEVANT EVIDENCE WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER TO ISSUE A TEMPORARY CIVIL PROTECTION ORDER .
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:
Notification of potential violation of military ________ Capital letters or bold & italic numbers indicate new material added to existing law;
Notification of potential violation of military Capital letters or bold & italic numbers indicate new material added to existing law;
dashes through words or numbers indicate deletions from existing law and such material is not part of the act.
dashes through words or numbers indicate deletionsfrom existing law andsuch material is not part of the act.
(1) A S USED IN THIS SECTIO,UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:
(1) AS USED IN THIS SECTION, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:
(a) "AMEDFORCES "MEANSTHE A RMY ,NAVY ,AIRFORCE ,MARINE CORPS , PACE FORCE ,AND COAST G UARD OF THEU NITED STATES.
(a) "ARMEDFORCES"MEANSTHEARMY,NAVY,AIRFORCE,MARINE CORPS, SPACE FORCE, AND COAST GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES.
(b) "COMMANDING OFFICER "MEANS A COMMISSIONED OFFICER OR WARRANT OFFICER IN A POSITION OF COMMAND IN THE ARMED FORCES OR N ATIONAL GUARD .
(b) "COMMANDING OFFICER" MEANS A COMMISSIONED OFFICER OR WARRANT OFFICER IN A POSITION OF COMMAND IN THE ARMED FORCES OR NATIONAL GUARD.
(c) "MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER "MEANS A PROTECTION ORDER ISSUED AGAINST A CURRENT MEMBER OFTHE ARMED FORCES OR N ATIONAL G UARD BY THE MEMBER S COMMANDING OFFICER THAT PROHIBITS THE MEMBER FROM :
(c) "MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER" MEANS A PROTECTION ORDER ISSUED AGAINST A CURRENT MEMBER OFTHE ARMED FORCES ORNATIONAL GUARD BY THE MEMBER'S COMMANDING OFFICER THAT PROHIBITS THE MEMBER FROM:
(I) CNTACTING ,HARASSING ,INJURINGINTIMIDATING,MOLESTING , THREATENING ,TOUCHING ,OR STALKING A PROTECTED PERSON ;
(I)CONTACTING, HARASSING, INJURING, INTIMIDATING, MOLESTING, THREATENING, TOUCHING, OR STALKING A PROTECTED PERSON;
(II) CMMITTING SEXUAL VIOLENCE BY SEXUALLY ASSAULTING OR ABUSING A PROTECTED PERSON ;
(II)COMMITTING SEXUAL VIOLENCE BY SEXUALLY ASSAULTING OR ABUSING A PROTECTED PERSON;
(III) ETERING OR REMAINING ON PREMISES OR COMING WITHIN A SPECIFIED DISTANCE OF A PROTECTED PERSON OR PREMISES (IV) TAKING,TRANSFERRING CONCEALING ,HARMING ,DISPOSINGOF, OR THREATENING HARM TO AN ANIMAL OWNED ,POSSESSED,LEASED ,KEPT, OR HELD BY A PROTECTED PERSON;OR (V) POSINGANYOTHERRISKORTHREAT OFPHYSICALHARMTOTHE PROTECTED PERSON OR THREAT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OR EMOTIONAL HARM TO THE PROTECTED PERSON .
(III)ENTERING OR REMAINING ON PREMISES OR COMING WITHIN A SPECIFIED DISTANCE OF A PROTECTED PERSON OR PREMISES;
(d) "NATIONALG UARD "MEANSTHEFEDERALLYRECOGNIZED A RMY N ATIONAL GUARD AND AIRN ATIONAL GUARD .
(IV) TAKING,TRANSFERRING, CONCEALING,HARMING, DISPOSINGOF, OR THREATENING HARM TO AN ANIMAL OWNED, POSSESSED, LEASED, KEPT, OR HELD BY A PROTECTED PERSON;
(e) "PROTECTED PERSON " MEANS THE PERSON IDENTIFIED IN A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER AS THE PERSON FOR WHOSE BENEFIT THE PROTECTION ORDER WAS ISSUED .
OR (V) POSING ANY OTHER RISK ORTHREAT OF PHYSICAL HARM TO THE PROTECTED PERSON OR THREAT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OR EMOTIONAL HARM TO THE PROTECTED PERSON.
PAGE 2-SENATE BILL 26-085 (2) W HEN A PEACE OFFICER HAS REASONABLE SUSPICION THAT A CRIME OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HAS OCCURRED ,THE PEACE OFFICER SHALL SEARCH THE NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER DATABASE TO DETERMINE WHETHER A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER HAS BEEN ISSUED AGAINST ONE OFTHE PARTIES .IFA MILITARYPROTECTIONORDERHASBEEN ISSUEDAGAINST APARTY THEPEACEOFFICERSHALLNOTIFYTHE MILITARY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT ENTERED THE PROTECTION ORDER INTO THE NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER DATABASE .
(d) "NATIONALGUARD" MEANSTHEFEDERALLY RECOGNIZEDARMY NATIONAL GUARD AND AIR NATIONAL GUARD.
(e) "PROTECTED PERSON" MEANS THE PERSON IDENTIFIED IN A MILITARY PROTECTION ORDER AS THE PERSON FOR WHOSE BENEFIT THE PROTECTION ORDER WAS ISSUED.
PA G E 2-SEN A TE BILL 26-085 (2) WHEN APEACEOFFICERHAS REASONABLE SUSPICIONTHATA CRIMEOFDOMESTICVIOLENCEHASOCCURRED,THEPEACEOFFICERSHALL SEARCH THE NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER DATABASE TO DETERMINE WHETHERAMILITARY PROTECTION ORDERHAS BEEN ISSUED AGAINSTONEOFTHEPARTIES.IFAMILITARYPROTECTIONORDERHASBEEN ISSUEDAGAINSTAPARTY,THEPEACEOFFICERSHALLNOTIFYTHEMILITARY LAWENFORCEMENTAGENCYTHATENTEREDTHEPROTECTIONORDERINTO THENATIONALCRIMEINFORMATIONCENTERDATABASE.
(7) (a) A temporary civil protection order may be issued if the issuingjudgeormagistratefindsthatariskorthreatofphysicalharmorthe threat of psychological or emotional harm exists to the person or persons seekingprotectionunderthecivil protectionorder.Indeterminingwhether a risk or threat of physical harmor the threat of psychological or emotional harm exists to one or more persons, the court shall consider all relevant evidence concerning the safety and protection of the persons seeking the protection order, regardless of when an incident occurred, or the existence of a protection order issued pursuant to section 18-1-1001 or 18-1-1001.5.
(7) (a) A temporary civil protection order may be issued if the issuingjudge ormagistrate finds that arisk orthreat ofphysical harm orthe threat ofpsychological or emotional harm exists to the person or persons seeking protection underthe civil protection order.
THEEXISTENCEOFAMILITARYPROTECTIONORDER ,ASDEFINEDINSECTION 18-6-806, ISRELEVANTEVIDENCETHATTHE COURT SHALLCONSIDERWHEN DETERMINING WHETHER THERE IS A RISK OR THREAT OF HARM .
In determining whether a risk orthreat ofphysical harm or the threat ofpsychological or emotional harm exists to one or more persons, the court shall consider all relevant evidence concerning the safety and protection of the persons seeking the protection order, regardless ofwhen an incident occurred, or the existence ofa protection order issued pursuant to section 18-1-1001 or 18-1-1001.5.
THEEXISTENCEOFAMILITARYPROTECTIONORDER,ASDEFINEDINSECTION 18-6-806,ISRELEVANTEVIDENCETHATTHECOURTSHALLCONSIDERWHEN DETERMININGWHETHERTHEREISARISKORTHREATOFHARM.
on the day following the expiration of the ninety-dayperiod after final adjournment of the general assembly(August 12, 2026, if adjournment sine die is on May 13, 2026);
on the day following the expiration of the ninety-day period after final adjournment ofthe general assembly (August 12, 2026, if adjournment sine die is on May 13, 2026);
except that, if a referendumpetitionisfiledpursuanttosection1(3)ofarticleVofthestate constitution against this act or an item, section, or part of this act within such period, then the act, item, section, or part will not take effect unless approvedbythepeopleatthegeneralelectiontobeheldinNovember2026 PAGE 3-SENATE BILL 26-085 and, in such case, will take effect on the date of the official declaration of the vote thereon by the governor.
except that, if a referendumpetition is filed pursuantto section 1(3) ofarticle Vofthe state constitution against this act or an item, section, or part of this act within such period, then the act, item, section, or part will not take effect unless approved bythe people atthe general electionto be held inNovember2026 PAGE 3-SENATE BILL 26-085 and, in such case, will take effect on the date ofthe official declaration of the vote thereon by the governor.
____________________________ ____________________________ James Rashad Coleman, Sr.
James Rashad Coleman, Sr.
Julie McCluskie PRESIDENT OF SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE THE SENATE OF REPRESENTATIVES ____________________________ ____________________________ Esther van Mourik Vanessa Reilly SECRETARY OF CHIEF CLERK OF THE HOUSE THE SENATE OF REPRESENTATIVES APPROVED________________________________________ (Date and Time) _________________________________________ Jared S.
~ ~ PRESIDENT OF SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE THE SENATE OF REPRESENTATIVES v ~ .
Polis GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF COLORADO PAGE 4-SENATE BILL 26-085
Es er van Mourik ~ eilly SECRETARY OF CHIEF CLERK OF THE HOUSE THE SENATE OF REPRESENTATIVES APPROVED o n 'T ~ 4 'r'\C1➔~ 2£JLJ~ 3 :
- o o r (Date a d Time) PAGE 4-SENATE BILL 26-085
View plain text versions (7)

Action History

  1. Governor Signed

  2. Signed by the President of the Senate

  3. Signed by the Speaker of the House

  4. Sent to the Governor

  5. Senate Considered House Amendments - Result was to Concur - Repass

  6. House Third Reading Passed - No Amendments

  7. House Third Reading Laid Over Daily - No Amendments

  8. House Second Reading Special Order - Passed with Amendments - Committee

  9. House Committee on Judiciary Refer Amended to House Committee of the Whole

  10. Introduced In House - Assigned to Judiciary

  11. Senate Third Reading Passed - No Amendments

  12. Senate Second Reading Passed with Amendments - Committee

  13. Senate Committee on Judiciary Refer Amended - Consent Calendar to Senate Committee of the Whole

  14. Introduced In Senate - Assigned to Judiciary

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

4 sponsors · 35 co-sponsors · 62 not signed on

Sponsors (4)

Co-sponsors (35)

Not signed on (62)

62 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 62 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

REPASS

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democrat 21000
Republican 10000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 36000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (36)
Member Party Vote
Gonzales J. — Yea
Pelton B. — Yea
Pelton R. — Yea
President — Yea
Adrienne Benavidez — Yea
Cathy Kipp Democrat Yea
Chris Kolker Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
Iman Jodeh Democrat Yea
James Coleman Democrat Yea
Janice Marchman Democrat Yea
Jeff Bridges Democrat Yea
Jessie Danielson Democrat Yea
Judy Amabile Democrat Yea
Katie Wallace Democrat Yea
Kyle Mullica Democrat Yea
Lindsey Daugherty Democrat Yea
Lisa Cutter Democrat Yea
Marc Snyder Democrat Yea
Matt Ball Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Yea
Nick Hinrichsen Democrat Yea
Robert Rodriguez Democrat Yea
Tom Sullivan Democrat Yea
Tony Exum Democrat Yea
William Lindstedt Democrat Yea
Barbara Kirkmeyer Republican Yea
Cleave Simpson Republican Yea
Janice Rich Republican Yea
John Carson Republican Yea
Larry Liston Republican Yea
Lisa Frizell Republican Yea
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Yea
Marc Catlin Republican Yea
Mark Baisley Republican Yea
Scott Bright Republican Yea

Official roll call →

CONCUR

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democrat 21000
Republican 10000
Unaffiliated 5000
Total 36000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (36)
Member Party Vote
Gonzales J. — Yea
Pelton B. — Yea
Pelton R. — Yea
President — Yea
Adrienne Benavidez — Yea
Cathy Kipp Democrat Yea
Chris Kolker Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
Iman Jodeh Democrat Yea
James Coleman Democrat Yea
Janice Marchman Democrat Yea
Jeff Bridges Democrat Yea
Jessie Danielson Democrat Yea
Judy Amabile Democrat Yea
Katie Wallace Democrat Yea
Kyle Mullica Democrat Yea
Lindsey Daugherty Democrat Yea
Lisa Cutter Democrat Yea
Marc Snyder Democrat Yea
Matt Ball Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Yea
Nick Hinrichsen Democrat Yea
Robert Rodriguez Democrat Yea
Tom Sullivan Democrat Yea
Tony Exum Democrat Yea
William Lindstedt Democrat Yea
Barbara Kirkmeyer Republican Yea
Cleave Simpson Republican Yea
Janice Rich Republican Yea
John Carson Republican Yea
Larry Liston Republican Yea
Lisa Frizell Republican Yea
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Yea
Marc Catlin Republican Yea
Mark Baisley Republican Yea
Scott Bright Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 10 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democrat 6001
Republican 4000
Total 10001
% of votes cast 91%0%0%9%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Cecelia Espenoza Democrat Yea
Javier Mabrey Democrat Yea
Jennifer Bacon Democrat Not Voting
Lorena Garcia Democrat Yea
Michael Carter Democrat Yea
Naquetta Ricks Democrat Yea
Yara Zokaie Democrat Yea
Ava Flanell Republican Yea
Matt Soper Republican Yea
Rebecca Keltie Republican Yea
Scott Slaugh Republican Yea

Official roll call →

BILL

Passed 32 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democrat 20001
Republican 10000
Unaffiliated 2003
Total 32004
% of votes cast 89%0%0%11%
How each member voted (36)
Member Party Vote
District 21 — Not Voting
Gonzales J. — Not Voting
Pelton B. — Not Voting
Pelton R. — Yea
President — Yea
Cathy Kipp Democrat Yea
Chris Kolker Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
Iman Jodeh Democrat Yea
James Coleman Democrat Yea
Janice Marchman Democrat Yea
Jeff Bridges Democrat Yea
Jessie Danielson Democrat Yea
Judy Amabile Democrat Yea
Katie Wallace Democrat Yea
Kyle Mullica Democrat Yea
Lindsey Daugherty Democrat Not Voting
Lisa Cutter Democrat Yea
Marc Snyder Democrat Yea
Matt Ball Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Yea
Nick Hinrichsen Democrat Yea
Robert Rodriguez Democrat Yea
Tom Sullivan Democrat Yea
Tony Exum Democrat Yea
William Lindstedt Democrat Yea
Barbara Kirkmeyer Republican Yea
Cleave Simpson Republican Yea
Janice Rich Republican Yea
John Carson Republican Yea
Larry Liston Republican Yea
Lisa Frizell Republican Yea
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Yea
Marc Catlin Republican Yea
Mark Baisley Republican Yea
Scott Bright Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 2000
Democrat 5000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Chris Kolker Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
Katie Wallace Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Yea
Nick Hinrichsen Democrat Yea
John Carson Republican Yea
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 85 do?
When a peace officer has reasonable suspicion that a crime of domestic violence has occurred, the peace officer is required to search the national crime information center database to determine whether a military protection order has been issued against one of the parties. If a military protection order has been issued against a party, the peace officer shall notify the military law enforcement agency that entered the protection order into the database.     The act includes the existence of a military protection order as relevant evidence that the court shall consider when determining whether to issue a temporary civil protection order.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)
Who sponsors SB 85?
SB 85 is sponsored by M. Rutinel, J. Phillips, J. McCluskie, B. Marshall, S. Lieder, R. Keltie, J. Joseph, J. Jackson, R. Gonzalez, M. Froelich, C. Clifford, Jessie Danielson (Democrat), Tony Exum (Democrat), J. Caldwell, Nick Hinrichsen (Democrat), Iman Jodeh (Democrat), Cathy Kipp (Democrat), Barbara Kirkmeyer (Republican), Kyle Mullica (Democrat), Rod Pelton (Republican), Dylan Roberts (Democrat), Robert Rodriguez (Democrat), Cleave Simpson (Republican), Marc Snyder (Democrat), Tom Sullivan (Democrat), Katie Wallace (Democrat), Mike Weissman (Democrat), A. Boesenecker, A. Hartsook, M. Duran, Matt Ball (Democrat), Lisa Frizell (Republican), Jeff Bridges (Democrat), Scott Bright (Republican), James Coleman (Democrat), Lisa Cutter (Democrat), Chris Kolker (Democrat), William Lindstedt (Democrat), and Janice Marchman (Democrat).
What is the current status of SB 85?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 10, 2026. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 85?
Track SB 85 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 85

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of SB 85

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →