All states · Colorado

Proposition 134: Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports A “yes” vote on Proposition 133 increases the penalties for child sex trafficking to life in prison without parole, and expands child sex trafficking to include buying sexual activity with a minor. A “no” vote on Proposition 133 keeps the existing felony criminal penalties for child sex trafficking with a sentencing range of 8 to 48 years in prison plus a mandatory parole period.

Proposition 134: Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports A “yes” vote on Proposition 133 increases the penalties for child sex trafficking to life in prison without parole, and expands child sex trafficking to include buying sexual activity with a minor. A “no” vote on Proposition 133 keeps the existing felony criminal penalties for child sex trafficking with a sentencing range of 8 to 48 years in prison plus a mandatory parole period.

Arguments for and against Upcoming Initiated statute Education: Higher EdEducation: PreK-12 As of 2026-10-10
Data note

NCSL lists initiative number; official ballot designation differs (mapped by title)

CO has no rebuttals; Blue Book arguments are written by Legislative Council Staff.

Page numbers/running headers removed from extracted text.

Ballot text (Ballot title)

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes creating new law restricting participation in all K-12 and collegiate school sports based on the participant’s sex as determined by certain aspects of their biological reproductive system, and, in connection therewith, requiring a school, institution of higher education, or athletic association to designate each school or intramural athletic team or sport as male, female, or coeducational; only allowing participants to compete on the team or sport of their designated sex or to compete on a coeducational team; creating an exception to allow a female to participate on a male-designated team or sport if there is no female team available; prohibiting a government entity, licensing or accrediting organization, or athletic association from entertaining a complaint, opening an investigation, or taking other adverse action against a school for maintaining separate teams or sports for females; and providing the commissioner of education with the authority to enforce the proposed initiative for K-12 school districts?

What a YES vote means

A “yes” vote on Proposition 134 means that all school-based athletic teams and sports must be designated as being for biological males or biological females only, or as mixed, and requires schools and school districts to adopt policies on sex eligibility for sports.

What a NO vote means

A “no” vote on Proposition 134 means that individual schools, school districts, and athletic associations may continue to set their own policies in alignment with current state and federal law about who is eligible to participate on a team or in a sport.

Explanatory statement

Not published by the state

Fiscal impact

State Spending Proposition 134 will increase workload and legal costs by an indeterminate amount in the Colorado Department of Education if a school district is intentionally out of compliance with the measure and the Commissioner of Education is required to take remedial action. Legal services are provided by the Department of Law. In addition, state institutions of higher education will have increased costs to adopt or update policies for interscholastic or intramural athletic programs to align with the requirements in the measure. Any costs are assumed to be paid by institutional revenue, such as tuition, fees, or athletic department revenue. Local Government Spending Proposition 134 will increase workload and may increase costs for schools, school districts and charter schools that offer interscholastic or intramural athletic programs to update and implement their policies. These costs are expected to be minimal. To the extent the Colorado Department of Education takes remedial action for noncompliance, legal and other costs may also increase for school districts.

Argument FOR

1) Females should be able to compete against other females. Allowing biological males to participate on female teams creates an unfair advantage for the males and can prevent female athletes from achieving wins, records, podium spots, and scholarship opportunities. The measure protects the accomplishments of female athletes and creates a consistent, statewide standard for participation on female teams. Without uniform rules, female athletes across the state compete under different policies and conditions, resulting in an uneven playing field. The measure ensures that all female athletes can compete fairly no matter where they live. 2) Allowing biological males to participate on female teams or in female sports jeopardizes the safety and physical and emotional boundaries of female athletes. Regardless of one’s gender identity, genetic differences between biological males and biological females can affect physical strength, stature, lung capacity, muscle tone, and growth. Males and females are separated in certain sports due to the physical differences between the sexes and the risk for injury. Beyond the field of play, shared locker rooms raise privacy concerns. The measure creates a reasonable policy grounded in biological sex that promotes the safety of all participants.

Colorado Legislative Council Staff (Blue Book; arguments are prepared by nonpartisan staff with public comment, not signed by proponents)

Argument AGAINST

1) The measure does not protect fairness; it turns athletic eligibility into a body inspection and manufactures new grounds for discrimination. It could subject many athletes, not just those who are transgender, to uncomfortable physical inspections. Mandating a statewide eligibility standard, but not a clear method for determining eligibility, will require schools and districts to create their own separate policies, which will likely lead to unfair and uneven treatment of student athletes across the state. Some athletes may be forced to undergo invasive or expensive testing to prove their biological sex, while others may be able to simply provide a note from a doctor. Certain athletes could even be targeted for additional testing based on their physical strength, appearance, or athletic success. 2) School sports should be a space where all kids can build confidence, health, and belonging and have the opportunity to learn teamwork, leadership, and goal setting. Targeting an at-risk group of students by preventing them from playing on teams with their peers and instead requiring them to play on teams that do not match their gender identity leads to harassment, shame, embarrassment, and feelings of isolation and exclusion. The measure’s rigid participation standards apply to kids of all ages and abilities, affecting even young children who just want to play on teams with their friends and peers and are not competing for championships or scholarships.

Colorado Legislative Council Staff (Blue Book)

Both columns use the same layout. Text is quoted from the official state guide. Views expressed belong to the argument authors.

Find more info