Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802 (2026)

Violations - penalties - immunity - repeal

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) (a) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for any person, as defined in section 24-34-301, to discriminate against an individual or group of individuals because the person has opposed any practice, made a discriminatory practice based on disability pursuant to part 5, 6, or 8 of this article 34, or because the person has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing conducted pursuant to part 5, 6, or 8 of this article 34.

(b) An individual with a disability, as defined in section 24-34-301, must not, by reason of the individual's disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities provided by a place of public accommodation, as defined in section 24-34-601 (1), a public entity, as defined in section 24-34-301, or a state agency, as defined in section 24-37.5-102, or be subjected to discrimination by any such place of public accommodation, public entity, or state agency.

(c) (I) Except as provided in subsection (1)(c)(II) of this section, discrimination pursuant to this section includes the failure of a public entity or state agency, as those terms are defined in section 24-34-301, to fully comply, on or before July 1, 2024, with the accessibility standards for individuals with a disability established by the office of information technology pursuant to section 24-85-103. Liability for noncompliance as to content lies with the public entity or state agency that manages the content. Liability for noncompliance of the platform hosting the content lies with the public entity or state agency that manages the platform.

(II) (A) A public entity or state agency is immune from liability for a violation of subsection (1)(c)(I) of this section until July 1, 2025, if the public entity or state agency demonstrates good faith efforts toward compliance with the accessibility standards established pursuant to section 24-85-103 or, as necessary, makes good faith efforts toward resolution of a complaint of noncompliance. To be eligible for the immunity authorized pursuant to this subsection (1)(c)(II), by July 1, 2024, a public entity's or state agency's good faith efforts must include creating a progress-to-date report that demonstrates concrete and specific efforts toward compliance on the entity's or agency's front-facing web pages; updating the report on a quarterly basis; and creating a clear, easy-to-find process for requesting redress for inaccessible digital products, including contact options that are not dependent on web access or digital accessibility and are prominently displayed on all front-facing web pages.

(B) If a civil action is filed pursuant to this subsection (1)(c) and a public entity or state agency alleges that it has made good faith efforts pursuant to this subsection (1)(c)(II), the court in which the civil action was filed shall determine, based on a preponderance of the evidence, whether the public entity or state agency has made good faith efforts, and, if the court determines that good faith efforts have been made, the court shall dismiss the action without prejudice.

(2) (a) An individual with a disability, as defined in section 24-34-301, who is subject to a violation of subsection (1) of this section or of section 24-34-502, 24-34-502.2, 24-34-601, or 24-34-803 based on the individual's disability may bring a civil suit in a court of competent jurisdiction and is entitled to a court order requiring compliance with the provisions of the applicable section and either of the following remedies:

(I) Repealed.

(II) The recovery of actual monetary damages; or

(III) A statutory fine of three thousand five hundred dollars, payable to each plaintiff for each violation.

(b) For a claim brought pursuant to section 24-85-103 for a violation of accessibility standards, the violation must be considered a single incident and not as separate violations if the violation occurred on a single digital product, including a website or an application.

(c) For a claim brought pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of this section for a construction- related accessibility violation, the violation must be considered a single incident and not as separate violations for each day the construction-related accessibility violation exists.

(d) (I) A small business defendant is entitled to a fifty percent reduction in a statutory fine assessed pursuant to subsection (2)(a)(III) of this section if it corrects the accessibility violation within thirty days after the filing of the complaint. The fifty percent reduction in a statutory fine does not apply, however, if the defendant knowingly or intentionally made or caused to have made the access barrier that caused the accessibility violation.

(II) For purposes of this subsection (2)(d), "small business" means an employer with twenty-five or fewer employees and no more than three million five hundred thousand dollars in annual gross income.

(III) Nothing in this subsection (2)(d) may be interpreted to result in a reduction in actual monetary damages awarded pursuant to subsection (2)(a)(II) of this section.

(3) An award of attorney fees and costs pursuant to section 24-34-505.6 (6)(b) applies to claims brought pursuant to this section.

(4) A court that hears civil suits pursuant to this section shall apply the same standards and defenses that are available under the federal "Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990", 42 U.S.C. sec. 12101 et seq., and its related amendments and implementing regulations.

(5) An agency in the state with the authority to promulgate rules related to protections for persons with disabilities shall not promulgate a rule that provides less protection than that provided by the federal "Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990", 42 U.S.C. sec. 12101 et seq., as amended.

Source: L. 79: Entire part R&RE, p. 940, § 3, effective July 1. L. 95: Entire section amended, p. 321, § 2, effective August 7. L. 2014: Entire section R&RE, (SB 14-118), ch. 250, p. 980, § 11, effective August 6. L. 2021: (1), IP(2)(a), and (2)(a)(III) amended and (5) added, (HB 21-1110), ch. 402, p. 2675, § 2, effective June 30. L. 2023: (1)(c) and (2) amended, (SB 23- 244), ch. 100, p. 370, § 3, effective April 20; (1)(b) and IP(2)(a) amended and (2)(a)(I) repealed, (HB 23-1032), ch. 271, p. 1613, § 2, effective May 25; (1)(b) and IP(2)(a) amended, (HB 23- 1296), ch. 269, p. 1600, § 6, effective May 25. L. 2024: (1)(c) amended, (HB 24-1454), ch. 255, p. 1676, § 2, effective May 24.

Editor's note: (1) Amendments to subsection (1)(b) by HB 23-1032 and HB 23-1296 were harmonized.

(2) Amendments to subsection IP(2)(a) by HB 23-1032, HB 23-1296, and SB 23-244 were harmonized.

(3) Amendments to subsection (2)(a)(I) by HB 23-1032 and SB 23-244 were harmonized.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration in HB 24-1454, see section 1 of chapter 255, Session Laws of Colorado 2024.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth Health Servs. Corp., 614 P.2d 891 (Colo. Ct. App. 1979).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth Health Servs. Corp., 614 P.2d 891 (Colo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 10× “Section 24-34-802, C.R.S. 1973. The exception provided where a particular disability prevents the performance of the work is a recognition that physical disabilities vary from one individual to another, and that, under some circumstances, the degree of disability may be…”

Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth, 559 P.2d 716 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “She also acknowledges that the legislature provided a criminal penalty for such violations in § 24-34-802, C.R.S.1973, making interference with the declared rights a misdemeanor.”

Chavez-Bravo v. Brighton Sch. Dist. 27J (D. Colo. 2025). · cites it 8× “” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802 (4). Colorado courts have not considered what specific “standards and defenses” are “available” under the ADA.”

Meggs v. Colorado Hosp. Grp., LLC (D. Colo. 2022). · cites it 3× “§ 12205 and Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802 (3) and shall file a motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to D.”

Meggs v. Colorado Hosp. Grp., LLC (D. Colo. 2023). · cites it 2× “§ 12205 and Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802 (3). Id. at 14 .”

McCraken (D. Colo. 2025). · cites it 2× “§ 12132 , and a second under the Colorado Anti- Discrimination Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802 . ECF No. 1 at 15–20.”

Salter v. State of Colorado (Colo. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 2× “§ 24-34-802(1)(b), C.R.S. 2025. Salter did not show that he was excluded from participation at a place of public accommodation, a public entity, or a state agency or that he was excluded from participation in Colorado’s judicial system.”

McCraken (D. Colo. 2026). “In support, the ECSO cites § 24-34-802(4), see [Doc. 124 at 12], but that statutory provision was repealed in 2025, see H.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802(1)(b) — 1 case

Salter v. State of Colorado (Colo. Ct. App. 2026). “§ 24-34-802(1)(b), C.R.S. 2025. Salter did not show that he was excluded from participation at a place of public accommodation, a public entity, or a state agency or that he was excluded from participation in Colorado’s judicial system.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802(4) — 2 cases

Chavez-Bravo v. Brighton Sch. Dist. 27J (D. Colo. 2025). “” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-802 (4). Colorado courts have not considered what specific “standards and defenses” are “available” under the ADA.”

McCraken (D. Colo. 2026). “In support, the ECSO cites § 24-34-802(4), see [Doc. 124 at 12], but that statutory provision was repealed in 2025, see H.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.