A new whistleblower lawsuit has been filed against Colorado Governor Jared Polis, accusing him of secretly pressuring local officials to hand over private financial information of residents sponsoring unaccompanied immigrant children to the Trump administration. The lawsuit alleges that Polis coerced state employees to violate state privacy laws, under the threat of termination, to comply with an immigration enforcement subpoena from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Allegations of Illegal Directives and Violations
Scott Moss, the director of the Division of Labor Standards and Statistics under Polis’s administration, filed the civil complaint in Denver. Moss claims that he was instructed by higher-ups to comply with an illegal directive to share personally identifiable information (PII) of Colorado residents with ICE. According to the lawsuit, the directive issued by Polis was made behind closed doors, and the governor allegedly signed an immigration enforcement subpoena.
Moss’s attorneys argue that the directive, which involved providing PII to ICE, violated a law Polis himself had signed into effect in 2021. This law specifically restricts state agencies from sharing nonpublic personal information with federal immigration officials unless there is a court order. Moss asserts that following this directive would have exposed state employees to significant professional and personal risks.
Moss’s Protests and Continued Pressure
Moss claims he repeatedly protested the illegal nature of the directive both internally and discreetly, in both written and verbal communications. Despite his concerns about the risks and the harm it could cause to Colorado residents, Moss was allegedly told that he would be expected to follow the governor’s orders. According to Moss’s complaint, he voiced his objections, arguing that turning over the requested financial data would harm the state’s commitment to protecting the privacy of its residents, especially children sponsored by immigrant families.
In his complaint, Moss states that even after initial indications that the Polis administration was analyzing the situation, he was informed in May that the decision had been made to comply with the ICE subpoena and produce the private information. Moss claims this action violates the 2021 law signed by Polis, as well as a new 2025 law extending those restrictions.
Concerns About Trust and Potential Penalties
Moss is deeply concerned that this directive could severely damage public trust in Colorado’s state agencies, potentially leading to people feeling that their personal data could be handed over to federal immigration authorities. The lawsuit stresses that such an action could lead to significant harm to the state employees involved, including personal penalties of up to $50,000 per violation of the privacy laws.
The lawsuit also highlights that the subpoena from ICE did not cite any criminal law violations or ongoing investigations, further raising concerns about the legality and motivation behind the request for such sensitive information.
Whistleblower Memo and Fallout
On June 3, Moss sent an internal memo to Colorado officials expressing his belief that complying with Polis’s directive was illegal. Moss’s memo, which was obtained by Law&Crime, stated that handing over personal data to ICE could cause long-lasting damage to the trust citizens have in state officials and agencies. He also warned that such actions could embroil the state in lawless or violent ICE raids targeting vulnerable individuals, including children.
As of now, the Polis administration has not responded to requests for comment on the lawsuit.
Legal and Ethical Implications
The lawsuit filed by Scott Moss raises serious concerns about the legal and ethical implications of Governor Polis’s actions. If the allegations are true, the case highlights the pressure placed on state employees to violate state privacy laws under the threat of termination. It also raises broader questions about the role of state governments in cooperating with federal immigration enforcement, especially when it involves the sensitive personal data of residents. With Moss’s trial approaching, the outcome of this case could have significant consequences for both state privacy laws and the broader issue of cooperation between state and federal authorities in immigration matters.
