The Alliance Defending Freedom organization filed a lawsuit this week on behalf of a Colorado athletic company focused on standing up for women’s rights and being “truthful about the biological differences between men and women.”

The lawsuit challenges Colorado’s House Bill 1312, which Gov. Jared Polis recently signed into law to amend the Colorado Antidiscrimination Act to make “misgendering” and “deadnaming” illegal.

During debate in the 2025 legislative session, Sen. Faith Winter, a sponsor of the controversial measure, said transgender individuals were being targeted more than “almost any community” right now.

“When they are facing backlash and retaliation and fear, it is time for us to stand up and say it is time,” she said in the March 6 Senate debate. “It is time to make sure that we are affirming that mistreating transgender folks is discrimination.”

In announcing the lawsuit to challenge the new law, ADF stated that HB 1312 requires businesses like XX-XY Athletics to address male customers who identify as female as “women.” The law further requires businesses to avoid any statement or advertisement that indicates customers are “unwelcome” based on their gender expression and chosen name.

ADF explained that requiring XX-XY to follow a person’s gender preference over biological identity puts the company at risk of violating Colorado’s law and facing cease-and-desist orders, expensive investigations, and civil and criminal penalties.

In short, Hal Frampton, the senior counsel for ADF, told Colorado Politics that this law is another example of Colorado lawmakers violating the First Amendment rights of citizens and businesses.

“The law makes it illegal for (XX-XY) to use biologically accurate language with customers and prospective customers in their advertising and with members of the general public,” Frampton said. “Their core message is about biological reality and about the impact that has on women’s sports. So, if they are not able to speak with biologically accurate language, they’re not able to get out their full message.”

The debate of transgender male athletes participating in women’s sports has become a hot-button issue nationwide. In California this month, tempers flared when a transgender athlete was allowed to participate in a track-and-field meet. The athlete took home first-place medals in several events in Division 3 of the California Interscholastic Federation Southern Section Finals.

While the second-place finisher in the triple-jump event set a record for her high school and scored an all-time personal best distance, the transgender athlete still took first place by over four feet.

The track meet has gained national attention and received backlash on social media from President Donald Trump, who signed an executive order in February banning transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports.

Trump took it a step further this week, threatening to cut California’s federal funds if trans athletes continue to be allowed to compete in women’s sports.

In Colorado, this is the second lawsuit challenging HB 1312. Earlier this month, several organizations and a western Colorado dermatologist filed a lawsuit, claiming that the law compels the plaintiffs to speak in favor of views they do not support in violation of their First Amendment rights. The complaint also challenges, on speech-based grounds, the requirement that public accommodation cannot advertise that certain people are unwelcome based on their protected characteristics.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit included Defending Education, the Colorado Parent Advocacy Network, Protect Kids Colorado, and Do No Harm. Travis Morrell, a Grand Junction dermatologist and member of Do No Harm, is also a plaintiff.

Frampton said it is unfortunate that the Colorado legislature continues to pass laws despite some major court losses.

In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a cakemaker who refused to make a cake for a transgender woman. Baker Jack Phillips was also defended by ADF, which argued before the nation’s highest court that Phillips’ actions were protected by free speech.

In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court again ruled against the state of Colorado in a case where a website developer refused to create a webpage for a same-sex couple. In the 6-3 decision, the court ruled that by requiring website designer Lorie Smith to serve everyone equally, the state was unconstitutionally forcing her to create a message she opposed.

When asked about the string of losses, Frampton said, “I think it’s unfortunate that on the heels of some of these other cases, that Colorado would choose to enact another law that infringes on free speech rights.”

In the latest case, Frampton said ADF is “excited to vindicate the right of XX-XY in court and make it so that Coloradans can continue to speak freely.”

Marissa Ventrelli and the Associated Press contributed to this report.