This November, Colorado voters will decide whether to change the state’s human trafficking laws. But victim advocates warn that the proposed changes could put survivors at risk.
Human trafficking is a severe form of exploitation involving force, fraud, or coercion for labor or sex. It’s a serious crime that can happen to people of all genders and ages, including children. Protecting children and holding traffickers accountable are shared goals across Colorado.
On Election Day, voters will consider Proposition 133, a ballot initiative that would increase penalties for child sex trafficking. Supporters say it would protect children and prevent convicted traffickers from harming others.
But a coalition of victim advocates, survivor leaders, and anti-trafficking organizations opposes the measure. They warn that survivors could face life in prison for crimes they were forced to commit.
Organizations working to end human trafficking in Colorado have different perspectives on Proposition 133, including within our network of partners at the Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking (LCHT).
To explore concerns about this ballot measure, we spoke with Onnastasia Cole, Policy and Outreach Manager at the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault (CCASA). She is a lead spokesperson for the coalition against Proposition 133.
What is Proposition 133?
Proposition 133, also called Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor, would make two changes to Colorado law:
- Require a sentence of life in prison without parole for anyone convicted of human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude.
- Expand the legal definition of child sex trafficking to include buying sexual activity with a minor.
Currently, human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude is a Class 2 felony in Colorado. A conviction carries 8 to 48 years in prison, followed by five years of parole.
Proposition 133 would make the crime a Class 1 felony and mandate life in prison without parole. That’s the same classification and sentence as first-degree murder. According to CBS Colorado, the state would become the seventh in the country to require this sentence for child sex trafficking.
Could trafficking survivors face life in prison?
One major concern about Proposition 133 is forced criminality. This happens when a trafficker forces or pressures a victim to commit a crime.
For example, a trafficker might force a victim to:
- Post online advertisements for sexual services.
- Recruit other young people, including friends or peers.
- Transport other victims to locations where exploitation takes place.
- Help arrange encounters with buyers.
These acts can fall under Colorado’s human trafficking laws, even when the person carrying them out is also a victim. “Many victim-survivors are forced or coerced by traffickers to engage in trafficking offenses included in Prop 133,” Onnastasia said.
Consider a teenager who is being trafficked and threatened with violence unless they recruit another young person. Although that teenager is a victim, they could also face criminal charges for recruiting someone else.
Under Proposition 133, someone convicted of a covered offense would face life in prison without parole. CCASA and other advocates worry that survivors could receive the same sentence as the people who exploited them.
Doesn’t Colorado law already protect trafficking victims?
Colorado law includes a protection called an affirmative defense. It allows someone charged with trafficking to argue that they committed the crime because they were being forced or coerced by a trafficker.
But using this defense can be hard. A survivor must first be charged with a crime. Then to use affirmative defense, they must plead guilty to that charge, then go to trial to prove they were being trafficked. That evidence isn’t always easy to find or to prove; survivors might not have records of threats or abuse.
“Survivors who are charged when they first come into contact with the criminal legal system struggle to be seen as victims,” Onnastasia explained. If the defense fails, the survivor could be convicted. Under Proposition 133, a conviction for a covered offense would mean life in prison without parole for a minor or young adult who was forced or coerced to commit these crimes against their will.
Today, judges can consider a person’s lived experience, trauma history, and circumstances when deciding a sentence. This is called judicial discretion.
“Judicial discretion is the last line of defense preventing victims from spending their lives in prison,” Onnastasia said. “It allows judges to offer leniency to survivors while issuing harsher sentences to the traffickers who first exploited them.”
Proposition 133 would remove that flexibility. Victim advocates argue that this discretion matters in cases where someone was both a victim of trafficking and forced to take part in a crime.
Could Proposition 133 make survivors less likely to seek help?
Leaving a trafficking situation can be difficult. Survivors may fear violence, threats against their loved ones, losing their housing, or being arrested. As a means of control, traffickers may also threaten to report victims to law enforcement for crimes they were forced to commit.
“Victim advocates and survivors also warn that Prop 133 could have a chilling effect on reporting,” Onnastasia said. “There is a widespread fear that traffickers will use Prop 133 to further coerce and exploit victims.”
CCASA also points out that many survivors already have reasons not to trust the criminal legal system. Some have been treated as offenders instead of victims. Others have had negative experiences when seeking help. Mandatory life sentences could make survivors even more afraid to report exploitation.
CCASA and LCHT believe survivors should be able to choose the path to justice that is best for them. That may or may not include engaging with the criminal legal system or reporting to law enforcement.
The Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking team training a group of professionals on how to recognize and respond to potential trafficking situations in their workplace.
What does it take to prevent human trafficking?
Supporters of Prop 133 believe life sentences would prevent trafficking and stop convicted traffickers from harming more children. Opponents question whether mandatory life sentences will address the conditions that allow trafficking to happen.
Traffickers often target people facing difficult circumstances. That can include unstable housing, poverty, discrimination, or a lack of support. Many are part of marginalized communities. Prevention means reducing these risks and vulnerabilities before exploitation begins.
Organizations working with survivors have stressed the importance of:
- Safe, stable housing so people have somewhere to turn when they need to leave an unsafe situation.
- Trauma-informed services that understand how exploitation affects survivors.
- Community education so more people can recognize and respond to trafficking.
- Survivor-centered reporting systems that make it safer for victims to seek help.
- Strong legal protections for victims forced to commit crimes.
These approaches are central to LCHT’s work. By operating Colorado’s 24/7 Human Trafficking Hotline, training professionals, conducting community-based research, and developing leaders, we help Colorado communities better understand trafficking and connect survivors to resources.
A comprehensive response to human trafficking is one that strengthens systems to prevent it and supports survivors.
Where can Colorado voters learn more?
Colorado voters can review the changes proposed by Prop 133 and read arguments from both sides to make an informed decision.
Onnastasia recommends exploring the following resources:
- “Vote ‘No’ on Prop 133” Joint Fact Sheet on Proposition 133: Concerns raised by victim advocates, anti-trafficking groups (including LCHT), and child advocacy centers.
- Colorado Proposition 133 Ballotpedia page: Background on the measure, including a link to CCASA’s Statement on Proposition 133, explaining why the organization opposes it.
- Voter guides:
- League of Women Voters of Colorado: Where the League stands on public policy issues and ballot measures.
- The Womanifesto: A nonpartisan ballot guide by the Women’s Foundation of Colorado.
- Caring for Colorado Foundation’s Voter Guide: Where the Foundation stands on 2026 ballot measures.
- Media and news:
- Denver Post: “Denver Post Editorial Board endorsements for the 2026 Colorado election”
- Denver Post: “Proposition 133 would punish child sex trafficking in Colorado with a mandatory prison sentence”
- Colorado Times Recorder: “‘Not Victim-Centered At All:’ Trafficking Survivors Slam Anti-LGBTQ Group’s Ballot Measure as Harmful to Victims”
- Colorado’s Official 2026 Blue Book (see page 52): The state’s voter guide explains the measure and arguments for and against it.
Keeping survivors at the center of the conversation
Protecting children from trafficking requires both accountability and prevention. As voters consider Proposition 133, survivor advocates are asking them to think about how mandatory sentences could fail victims forced to take part in trafficking-related crimes.
The debate is a reminder of how complex human trafficking can be and why it’s important to listen to people with lived experience. By learning from survivors and asking difficult questions, Colorado can continue building a stronger response to exploitation.
