This story was produced by the Colorado Capitol News Alliance. It first appeared at coloradosun.com.
Colorado lawmakers Monday abandoned an effort to tweak Colorado’s first-in-the-nation artificial intelligence law after it became clear that five days of intense negotiations between Democrats, the tech industry, consumer advocacy groups and unions wouldn’t yield any results.
Instead, Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez, D-Denver, amended Senate Bill 4 — which would have rewritten the law — to push the start date of the policy back to June 30, 2026, from February. That will give the legislature a chance to make changes once it returns to the Capitol in January for its regular, 120-day lawmaking term.
The decision came after a tentative deal reached Sunday among consumer advocates, some in the tech industry and others on how to move forward fell apart.
Negotiations over the AI law, which is meant to prevent the technology from being used as a tool of discrimination, have rocked the Capitol since lawmakers returned to the building Thursday for a special session, with shouting at times filling the halls outside of the House and Senate.
Democrats have been disagreeing with each other. Lobbyists have been livid. Confusion, anger and rumors have spread like a virus.
“It became impossible to iron out a path forward that works for everyone,” Rodriguez told the Senate as he amended the bill. “I believe this is the path forward to build on the progress we’ve made.”
Senate Bill 4 still has to pass the House before the delay is made final. It’s possible, though highly unlikely, a shakeup could happen before then.
The new version of the bill, assuming it passes, means the last hopes for critics of the law — including the tech industry, Gov. Jared Polis, Attorney General Phil Weiser and members of the state’s congressional delegation — are that the legislature will tweak the policy next year. The governor and tech leaders in particular had hoped for this outcome.
“By extending the timeline, we now have the opportunity to work collaboratively on practical solutions that strengthen consumer trust, safeguard jobs, and preserve Colorado’s competitiveness,” Brittany Morris Saunders, president and CEO of the Colorado Technology Association, said in a written statement.
Loren Furman, who leads the Colorado Chamber of Commerce, thanked Rodriguez for “allowing Colorado businesses more time to work on the current AI law instead of pushing bad policy through a rushed special session process.”
But shaping the statute in a way everyone can agree on has proven impossible for going on two years.
Polis asked lawmakers to take up the AI law when the legislature gathered starting Thursday for a special session primarily aimed at plugging a $750 million hole in the state budget caused by tax policy changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. That’s the Republican federal tax and spending bill passed in July and signed into law by President Donald Trump.
When Rodriguez passed Colorado’s law regulating artificial intelligence in 2024, it created an uproar over concerns it was too stringent and would stifle technological advances. At the time, he, the governor and the tech industry agreed to work together to make changes ahead of it going into effect.
But an attempt earlier this year during the legislature’s regular session failed — as did a last-ditch effort to postpone when the law takes effect.
Rodriguez warned heading into the special session that the compressed timeframe would make it very difficult to reach a deal on how to change the AI law, which was designed to prevent AI from discriminating and harming people when they do things like apply for jobs, seek out loans and pursue a college degree.
“We shouldn’t be focusing on this in special session,” he said last week. “I was ready to deal with it all summer so we could deal with it as soon as (the 2026) session started.”
Still, Rodriguez said heading into the special session that he “really hoped” he could broker an agreement to rein in an industry he likened to “kids running with scissors.”
On Sunday night, it appeared lawmakers were approaching a deal. Top Democrats told their colleagues that they had crafted the framework of an agreement. But by Monday morning, the compromise started to fall apart, mainly over how liable AI developers and deployers should be when their technology leads to discrimination.
“Business, consumer protection advocates, labor and educators came together, but big tech didn’t like the bill because they don’t like the liability,” Rodriguez said on the Senate floor Monday.
State Rep. Brianna Titone, an Arvada Democrat who was another lead sponsor of Senate Bill 4, said “we had a good thing going” with the pending compromise. But she said tech companies were being unreasonable in how much influence they wanted in the bill-drafting process.
Titone took her name off the bill Monday night in protest.
“I’m not going to support kicking the can down the road,” she said.
State Rep. Michael Carter, an Aurora Democrat who ran a competing AI regulatory bill backed by the industry, said the delay was the only option.
“Give us some breathing room,” he said. “Let’s do it right. Let’s not rush it.”
After hours of work on Monday afternoon, the last vestiges of hope for a deal were gone. Rodriguez opted to release the legislature from what was starting to feel like a hostage situation — the special session couldn’t end until there was a resolution on AI.
Sen. Julie Gonzales, a Democrat from Denver, voted for the bill in its amended form, but in a speech on the Senate floor urged her colleagues to continue their work “to hold these powerful companies to account.”
She called out the intense tech lobbying effort during the special session.
“All 35 of us in this building know that we too have witnessed the stunning brunt of AI leverage,” she said.
The law, unless it is changed next year by the legislature, will require companies to assess and disclose, to regulators and consumers, when AI is being used for consequential decisions, like employment, loans and housing. It will also require companies to provide an explanation of how their technology works to consumers who don’t like how AI made a determination.
The Colorado Attorney General’s Office would enforce the law, which carries a fine of up to $20,000 per violation, and field complaints.
