Summary#

“Holocaust Memorial” is Colorado House Joint Resolution 26-1027. It is a resolution, not a law that creates or amends a statute. Its stated goal is to remember the Holocaust and promote education and efforts to prevent antisemitism and other hate.

• The General Assembly expresses remembrance of the Holocaust and names survivors Fred Bryner, Samuel Weinberg and Silvia Weinberg.
• It calls for promoting antibias, bullying-prevention, and Holocaust and genocide education programs in school districts and universities. It specifically mentions antisemitic incidents targeting Jewish students, including because of their actual or perceived support for Israel.
• It declares that Coloradans should understand the power of words, remember past injustices and work to prevent future atrocities.
• It directs that copies of the resolution be sent to named education, community and cultural organizations. It does not establish a physical memorial.

What it means for you#

• School districts and universities: The resolution encourages promotion of education and prevention programs, but does not require these institutions to create or run them.
• Students and families: It does not create a new student right, service, complaint process or protection that can be enforced under this resolution.
• Public schools: The resolution says an existing law requires Holocaust and genocide studies as a condition of public high school graduation. The text of that law was not supplied, so I could not verify its current requirements.
• General public: The resolution states what the General Assembly wants Coloradans to remember and understand. It does not require individuals to take action.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

• The resolution does not appropriate money, set a budget, or require staffing.
• It does not say whether promoting programs would involve costs or identify who would pay them.

What is unclear#

• The resolution does not say what “promote” means in practice, who would lead that work, or whether any programs would receive funding.
• It sets no timelines, targets, reporting duties or way to measure whether the stated goals are met.
• It does not explain how schools or universities should address the reference to students targeted over actual or perceived support for Israel.
• The resolution describes an existing public-school graduation requirement, but the underlying law was not supplied for comparison.

Case for#

• A possible argument for the resolution is that public remembrance can preserve survivors’ accounts as fewer people remain who can share them firsthand.
• Promoting Holocaust and genocide education and antibias programs could give schools and universities a way to address the harms the resolution describes.
• Naming organizations to receive the resolution may help draw attention to groups already involved in education and remembrance.

Case against#

• One concern is that the resolution expresses goals but does not fund programs or assign anyone responsibility for carrying them out.
• It does not explain what specific actions would prevent antisemitic incidents, or how success would be measured.
• The resolution’s reference to targeting based on support for Israel is not accompanied by guidance on how schools or universities should apply it.