Camp v. City of Westminster (Amicus)

The ACLU of Colorado filed an amicus brief urging the Colorado Supreme Court to conclude that Colorado state protections preempt municipal sentencing schemes that punish identical conduct more harshly and such schemes violate Colorado’s longstanding equal protection guarantee. On December 22, 2025, the Court held that municipalities may not authorize harsher sentences than state law allows for an identical offense.

On November 7, we filed an amicus brief in partnership with Colorado Freedom Fund (CFF) urging the Colorado Supreme Court to reaffirm Colorado’s longstanding equal protection guarantee and describing the findings of our investigation into other constitutional violations in Colorado’s municipal courts.

In Camp v. City of Westminster, Aleah Camp allegedly stole less than $300 worth of goods under the Westminster Municipal Code, which provides for a punishment of up to $2650 and imprisonment up to 364 days. If Ms. Camp had been charged under the state statute, however, the maximum fine would have been $300, and the maximum term of imprisonment 10 days. Ms. Camp argued that the state sentencing scheme preempts the municipal scheme and the due-process clause of the Colorado Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. The legal issue in this case is the same as that in Mobley v. Rifle, in which ACLU-CO also submitted an amicus brief.

Our amicus brief in support of Ms. Camp explained how Ms. Camp’s experience is emblematic of accused people who face criminal charges in municipal courts across Colorado. Our brief detailed how the unique structure of municipal courts, including their incomplete separation from the prosecuting entity before them, the simplified procedures they employ, their lack of external oversight, and the paucity of well-resourced and fully independent defense counsel, makes them a risk to the right of accused people. Our brief also reported on the uneven availability of basic constitutional protections in Colorado municipal courts, including our findings in two ongoing investigations: our investigation into the Pueblo Municipal Court and our co-investigation with CFF into the Grand Junction Municipal Court. In both courts, we found that municipal defendants were mostly poor, unhoused, mentally ill, or otherwise disabled.

In Pueblo Municipal Court, we discovered that accused people were routinely convicted of a municipal crime Pueblo called “Contempt of Court,” without ever receiving a charging document explaining the charges against them. Pueblo used this municipal ordinance to sentence people to long jail sentences – hundreds of days -- for missing court dates, often stemming from tickets as low-level as standing on a median. We explained to the Colorado Supreme Court how these unconstitutional sentences disproportionately impacted Pueblo’s Black, Latine, and Indigenous communities.

In Grand Junction Municipal Court, CFF and ACLU-CO discovered that poor, incarcerated accused people were not provided lawyers at their first appearance. When people asked for lawyers, the court told them there were none in that courtroom, and they would have to wait to speak to one. The court routinely coerced unrepresented people into plea deals, by offering to release them that day if they agreed to plead guilty on the spot. This practice disproportionally impacted the unhoused, the mentally ill, and those in withdrawal.

Our amicus brief explained that the unconstitutional sentencing disparities between municipal ordinances and state statutes are more dangerous in Colorado’s municipal courts, where lack of transparency and limited procedural protections, make the violations of constitutional rights of already vulnerable people harder to protect.

On December 22, 2025, in a unanimous opinion, the Colorado Supreme Court held that municipalities may not authorize harsher sentences than state law allows for an identical offense. Finding that regulation of low-level criminal conduct is a matter of mixed statewide and local concern, the Court concluded that municipal sentencing provisions that authorize harsher penalties than state law permits for identical conduct are preempted by state law. The Court did not reach the question of equal protection.

Media:

“Colorado Supreme Court rules on municipal vs. state sentences,” The Denver Post, December 22, 2025.