Democratic lawmakers eye reviving a provision related to gender identity in child custody cases that was stripped from a bill signed into law last year.

Last session, lawmakers passed House Bill 1312, which dealt with legal protections for transgender individuals. The law included new provisions dealing with name changes on marriage certificates, sex designations on driver’s licenses, and school dress codes.

Specifically, the bill requires county clerks and recorders to issue name changes on marriage certificates when requested but leave no indication or mark that the certificate has been modified. It allows an individual to change the sex designation on a driver’s license up to three times, instead of just once, before being required to submit a court order.

Finally, the bill permits a student to choose from any options provided in a dress code policy.

As introduced, however, HB 1312 sought to penalize “deadnaming” and “misgendering” as discriminatory actions and compelled “publishers” to use a person’s “chosen name” when asked. As initially drafted, refusing to comply would have served as evidence of the intent to discriminate.

In its original form, the bill would also have mandated the courts to consider “misgendering” and “deadnaming” as forms of “coercive control” in child custody cases.

The bill’s sponsors ultimately removed both the custody-related language and provisions addressing “deadnaming” and “misgendering” before sending the measure to the governor.

In its final form, HB 1312 includes a legislative declaration stating that no Colorado resident may be discriminated against based on a person’s protected class and that the General Assembly supports “freedom of choice,” including seeking “legally protected health-care activities.”

The legislation had drawn advocates from both sides of the debate to the state Capitol, who showed up in droves to testify for and against the bill — more than 700 witnesses signed up to testify during its hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Many parents expressed worries with the bill’s provisions on child custody cases, as did several prominent organizations that advocate for LGBTQ+ individuals. Groups like One Colorado and Planned Parenthood of the Rockies opposed the measure due to concerns that its repeal could lead to LGBTQ individuals losing protections under Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws.

Gov. Jared Polis said he was “not comfortable” with the proposed family law changes outlined in the bill, noting they were removed from the final bill. What’s left in the bill as , he said, are a “few provisions that make it easier to reflect the gender identity of folks,” adding “a lot of the controversial parts were removed during the (legislative) process.”

The governor credited the changes to the “voices of the thousands of Coloradans who came to the state Capitol to have their perspectives heard.”

In May, several organizations filed a lawsuit seeking to block parts of the law, arguing it violates the First Amendment by compelling speech. The plaintiffs claimed the statute punishes individuals who refuse to use a person’s chosen name or pronouns and suppresses traditional views on sex and gender.

On the first day of the 2026 legislative session, Senate Democrats introduced a bill that would revive elements of the early 2025 version. The measure would require courts to suppress records related to name-change petitions filed on behalf of minors and to consider whether parents “recognize” a child’s identity as it relates to a protected class in custody cases.

Protected classes include race, religion, sexuality, disability, and gender identity.

This year’s proposal — Senate Bill 26-018 — is sponsored by Sens. Chris Kolker, D-Centennial, who also sponsored last year’s HB 1312, and Katie Wallace, D-Longmont, and Reps. Lorena Garcia, D-Adams County, and Meg Froelich, D-Englewood. Garcia also sponsored HB 1312.