Concerning measures to support victim-survivors of certain crimes that do not include changes to substantive criminal offenses.
SB 26-095 makes a series of procedural and victim-services changes intended to support victim-survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking, and human trafficking without changing the underlying criminal offenses. It requires medical professionals who perform sexual assault forensic exams to tell patients how to find out when testing is finished and how to obtain results and records, and it authorizes emergency-room staff to dispense a 30-day supply of prophylactic drugs for sexually transmitted infections after a sexual assault. The bill also expands options for victim testimony in criminal cases, including closed-circuit television testimony in certain cases involving domestic violence, unlawful sexual behavior, stalking, and human trafficking, and allows remote testimony by forensic scientists when both parties consent.
The bill further strengthens protections for victim-survivors in civil and employment-related disputes. It creates a special motion to dismiss for claims arising from protected statements made by victim-survivors in criminal, Title IX, child welfare, protection order, child abuse reporting, and other quasi-judicial proceedings, with discovery stayed while the motion is pending and attorney fees available to the prevailing party. It also makes predispute arbitration agreements and joint-action waivers unenforceable at the request of a person alleging sexual harassment or sexual misconduct, and places the court—not an arbitrator—in charge of deciding enforceability.
In the law-enforcement and state-agency space, the bill requires annual peace officer in-service training to include a two-hour trauma-informed response component and allows trauma-informed investigation and victim-survivor response training to be funded through the peace officer training and support fund. It renames the Colorado sexual assault forensic medical evidence review board as the Colorado sexual assault response review board and expands its membership to include additional stakeholders, including victim-survivors and crime laboratory representatives.
The overall sentiment reflected by the bill’s structure and sponsorship is strongly supportive of victim-survivors, with an emphasis on trauma-informed practices, access to information, and reducing procedural barriers in court and workplace dispute resolution. Because no committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, there is no documented opposition in the supplied materials, but the most likely points of contention are the bill’s limits on arbitration agreements, the special anti-retaliation dismissal procedure, and the expanded use of closed-circuit or remote testimony in criminal proceedings.
The bill amends multiple sections of Colorado law governing medical forensic exams, civil procedure, arbitration, evidence, criminal procedure, peace officer training, and the sexual assault response review board. It adds new notice duties for medical providers, creates a new special motion to dismiss for claims based on protected victim-survivor statements, voids certain predispute arbitration and class-action waivers in sexual harassment and sexual misconduct disputes, authorizes closed-circuit television testimony for certain victim-survivors, and expands trauma-informed training and board membership. It affects victims, hospitals, medical providers, courts, employers, arbitrators, peace officers, and state review-board members.
The bill appears to have been received as a victim-centered reform measure, with a clear emphasis on trauma-informed response, access to information, and procedural protections for people reporting or testifying about abuse and exploitation. Its caption and provisions suggest broad policy support for improving victim-survivor treatment across the criminal justice and civil systems. No vote record or committee transcript was provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or amendment debate in the supplied materials.
The most notable areas of potential contention are the bill’s restrictions on predispute arbitration agreements and joint-action waivers in sexual harassment and sexual misconduct disputes, which may draw objections from employers or contract advocates. The special motion to dismiss for claims arising from protected victim-survivor statements could also be controversial because it creates an early dismissal mechanism and fee-shifting rules that may be viewed as limiting certain lawsuits. In addition, the closed-circuit television testimony provisions and remote forensic-scientist testimony may raise due-process or confrontation concerns for criminal defendants, although the bill includes consent and court-determination safeguards.