Concerning cohabitation as a means to commit the offense of bigamy.
Summary
SB26-013 narrows Colorado’s bigamy statute by removing “cohabits in this state with another person” as conduct that can constitute bigamy. Under current law as amended by the bill, a married person or a person in a civil union commits bigamy only by marrying or entering into another civil union while still legally married or in a civil union; the separate statutory definition of cohabitation as living together under the representation of being married is repealed.
The bill therefore eliminates cohabitation as an independent basis for criminal liability under the bigamy statute and leaves marriage and civil-union conduct as the operative triggers. It applies to Colorado Revised Statutes section 18-6-201 and repeals section 18-6-203, which had defined cohabitation for purposes of the offense. The act takes effect after the standard referendum period, unless referred to voters.
Impact
The bill amends Colorado’s criminal code by narrowing the scope of the bigamy offense in section 18-6-201 and repealing the related definition section 18-6-203. As a result, prosecutors can no longer rely on cohabitation alone as a statutory element of bigamy; the offense is limited to a married person or civil-union partner entering a new marriage or civil union while still legally bound to the prior one. The change affects people subject to bigamy prosecutions, as well as law enforcement and courts interpreting the offense.
Sentiment
The available record shows little overt controversy or debate, and the bill advanced through the Judiciary committees and was ultimately signed by the Governor. That suggests generally favorable or at least unopposed sentiment around clarifying and narrowing the statute. The absence of recorded votes or committee transcripts limits the ability to identify detailed support or opposition arguments.
Contention
The main substantive point of contention, to the extent one exists, is the removal of cohabitation as a criminal trigger for bigamy. Supporters would likely view this as a clarification that bigamy should turn on formal marital or civil-union status rather than living arrangements, while any critics might argue that the change narrows enforcement too much or removes a tool for addressing deceptive marital conduct. No specific opposing stakeholders or arguments are documented in the provided materials.