Colorado Democrats advance controversial bill targeting parental rights in LGBT custody battles

04/08/2025 / By Laura Harris

Colorado Democrats introduced HB24-1039 (Kelly Loving Act), allowing courts to consider misgendering, deadnaming or threatening to expose a child’s gender-affirming care as “coercive control” in custody disputes, potentially restricting parental rights.
The bill would block Colorado courts from enforcing other states’ laws that allow child removals over gender-affirming care, escalating legal tensions between states.
The legislation would mandate schools to recognize students’ chosen names, ban gender-specific dress codes and classify misgendering as “discriminatory acts.”
Republicans and parental rights advocates argue the bill undermines parental authority, violates the First Amendment, and could lead to unjust custody losses. Critics claim it was introduced late to limit opposition.
Opponents, including researchers and parents, warn that affirming a child’s transgender identity prematurely can disrupt natural development, citing cases where children desisted or suffered worsened mental health after medical interventions.

Democrats in the Colorado Legislature are pushing a new bill that undermines parental rights by allowing courts to weigh custody decisions against parents who “misgender” or “deadname” their children.

The Kelly Loving Act (HB24-1039), named after a victim of the 2022 Club Q nightclub shooting, would classify misgendering, deadnaming or threatening to expose a child’s gender-affirming care as forms of “coercive control” in custody disputes. Courts would be required to consider such actions when determining parenting time and the “best interests of the child.”

HB24-1039 also seeks to block Colorado courts from enforcing other states’ laws that allow child welfare agencies to remove children from parents who permit gender-affirming medical care. (Related: Maine’s pro-LGBT Democratic governor signs law allowing 16-year-olds to receive cross-sex hormones without parental consent.)

Beyond custody battles, the legislation would label misgendering and deadnaming as “discriminatory acts,” require schools to recognize students’ “chosen names” for any reason, ban gender-specific dress codes and mandate that state forms include both legal and chosen names.

The bill, which passed the Colorado House Judiciary Committee in a 7-4 vote on April 1, now heads to the Assembly floor for further debate.

Critics: HB24-1039 only attack parental rights

During the Judiciary Committee hearing, critics argued that the bill only attacks parental rights.

State Rep. Jarvis Caldwell (R-District 20) who raised alarms about the bill on social media, said that Democrats introduced it late on March 28, Friday, to give opponents less than 24 hours to prepare before the committee hearing.

“In my opinion, the goal is to eliminate the ability of a parent to seek treatment for gender confusion and dysphoria.” I’ve seen many radical bills this legislative session, but this is by far the most egregious. At a minimum, it attacks parental rights, local control, the U.S. Constitution, and more specifically, the First Amendment,” Caldwell said.

Lori Gimelshteyn, executive director of the Colorado Parent Advocacy Network, echoed a similar statement. She called the bill an “unconstitutional overreach” that criminalizes parenting.

Mia Hughes, a senior researcher at Genspect, and Erin Lee, executive director of Protect Kids Colorado (speaking personally), also addressed lawmakers. Hughes warned lawmakers that affirming a child’s transgender identity can interrupt natural development, citing studies showing most gender-confused children eventually desist.

“It’s easy to turn a little boy into a convincing girl just by putting him in a dress and giving him a girl’s name, but the illusion becomes unsustainable when testosterone begins to surge, so now he must medicalize,” Hughes said, claiming that medical interventions like puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries often cause permanent harm.

In relation to Hughes’ statement, Lee testified that her daughter was secretly transitioned at school after being convinced that normal puberty discomfort meant she was transgender, but her daughter’s identity only worsened her mental distress.

“If this law was in place four years ago when CPS came to my door for non-affirmation, I would have lost my child,” she said. “Parents have long been bullied by the suicide myth: that you must transition your child or else they will kill themself. Now the state is adding to that: transition your child or else we will take them from you,” Lee said.

Check out Gender.news for similar stories.

Watch this clip of Muslim families in Maryland’s Montgomery County protesting against LGBT books used in the MCPS.

This video is from the Puretrauma357 channel on Brighteon.com.