In an era where free speech is increasingly under threat from government overreach, Colorado’s Senate Bill 25-086 presents yet another alarming attempt to curtail open discourse under the guise of “protecting” social media users. The bill is so troubling that political opposites such as Independence Institute, a free market think tank, the progressive youth advocacy group New Era Colorado, and RINO Watch Colorado, the self-proclaimed voice of grassroots Republicans, have all come out in firm opposition to the measure. While these organizations rarely find common ground, they agree that this bill sets a dangerous precedent for government control over online speech.
Deputizing social media companies
At its core, Senate Bill 86 seeks to regulate social media platforms by imposing strict requirements on content moderation, user removals, and law enforcement cooperation. Among the bill’s most concerning provisions is the requirement that social media companies determine within 72 hours whether a user has violated the platform’s policies or state and federal law. If a violation is found, the company must remove the user within 24 hours—a mandate that effectively deputizes private companies to police speech at the behest of the state.
This rushed enforcement process leaves little room for due process or thoughtful review. Instead, it incentivizes social media companies to err on the side of censorship rather than risk punishment under Colorado’s broad “deceptive trade practices” statute. The likely outcome? More voices silenced, more accounts banned, and an increasingly sanitized digital space where only state-approved speech is permitted.
Further, the bill’s vague definitions of prohibited activity—such as “subject use” violations that include selling illicit substances or firearms—open the door to arbitrary enforcement and politically motivated deplatforming. The government shouldn’t be in the business of deciding what speech is acceptable, nor should it coerce private platforms into acting as enforcers of an ill-defined and ever-changing set of online restrictions.
Careful what you post
History has shown that broad, ambiguous speech regulations lead to political bias in content moderation. The major social media platforms already demonstrate clear ideological leanings in their enforcement policies. With the hostile Senate Bill 86 attempt at regulating social media platforms, Colorado state government is adding another layer of control, incentivizing social media companies to crack down even harder, such as targeting dissenting opinions under the justification of “compliance.”
The bill’s law enforcement provisions are equally troubling. It mandates that large social media platforms provide a “streamlined process” for Colorado law enforcement to demand user information, including compliance with search warrants within 72 hours via “a staffed hotline for Colorado law enforcement agency personnel.” While cracking down on criminal activity is a legitimate goal, fast-tracking police access to user data without clear legal guardrails could easily lead to government surveillance abuses.
And let’s not forget the bill’s chilling effect on public discourse. If users fear that their posts—even those made in jest or taken out of context—could be reported as violations, they’ll be far less likely to engage in open discussions. A thriving democracy depends on a free and open marketplace of ideas, not a digital space where speech is constantly monitored and swiftly punished.
Senate Bill 86 isn’t about “protecting” users—it’s about empowering government to control what can and cannot be said online.
Vanessa Rutlege is communications manager at Independence Institute, a free market think tank in Denver.
