Denver Lions Club: Immigration, Culture, and Community Strength (May 13, 2026)
It is a pleasure to be with you today to celebrate the integral role that immigrants play in our vibrant communities and culture as well as to discuss the importance of resisting rising intolerance and hate against immigrants and others. Our nation was founded with a motto of e pluribus unum—out of many, we are one. That commitment is to an inclusive and pluralistic republic that is befitting of a nation of immigrants. Today, we find that promise being stretched and broken, highlighting the important work ahead.
I. My Family’s Immigrant Story
Let me begin with my family’s immigrant story. In 1945, my mom was born in a Nazi concentration camp, Buchenwald. My mother’s, and my grandmother’s, story of survival is a miracle, and it’s another miracle that I am even here. That story would not be possible without the United States of America, as it was U.S. Army soldiers who liberated my grandmother and my mom.
After my family was liberated from the Nazis, they had one goal—to come to the United States of America. My grandmother had an uncle here and believed this was the land of freedom and opportunity for all. With the help of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), my family secured the right to immigrate, as refugees, to the United States. After World War II, they, like many refugees today, had nowhere else to go. And they were welcomed in the United States.
The ability of my family, like so many, to come to the United States not speaking English, having no money, and possessing no marketable job skills is a testament to what the Statue of Liberty, inscribed with the words of Jewish-American poet Emma Lazarus, invites the world—“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” And in one generation, my family story moves from my mom being born in a concentration camp to my life’s journey in public service. That includes serving as a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, working in the White House for President Barack Obama, and serving as Colorado’s Attorney General.
My personal and professional journey is one of believing in and striving for a nation that does not view different people as “others.” We are all, as our national motto celebrates, part of America. If you are naturalized here or are born here, the Fourteenth Amendment promises, you are an American.
Our nation’s spirit of inclusion differed from many countries around the world. Unlike countries that adopted a national religion, the United States was founded on a commitment to protect religious liberty for all Americans. For those persecuted in Europe because of their faith, whether Catholics, Jews, or Quakers, the United States offered refuge.
President George Washington is revered for his leadership that embraced religious tolerance and took seriously the idea of e pluribus unum. He once said to a Jewish synagogue:
For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.[1]
And quoting from the Book of Micah, Washington wished for the Jewish community in America to:
continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy.[2]
In Washington’s aspiration for America described in this passage, there is no “other.” There is only us. That’s what e pluribus unum means—out of many, we are one. In my religious tradition, we are also taught not to treat anyone as an “other.” During the holiday of Passover, which celebrates the Jews’ exodus from Egypt and enslavement, we have a festive meal called a Seder that includes the tradition of removing some of our wine to mourn the deaths of Egyptians when the Jews left Egypt. And we are also taught to “never forget the stranger, for we were strangers in a strange land.”
I believe in that vision. We must resist the rising tide of hate and tendencies to treat some people—immigrants, transgender people, Muslims, Jews, and more—as an “other,” as a stranger. This rising intolerance is a threat to the essence of our national motto and spirit. We must resist efforts to divide us by dehumanizing those from whom we are different or have different beliefs.[3] The increasing rise of hate, and the waving of symbols of Nazism, the Confederacy, the Ku Klux Klan—these are not harmless acts. Nor is language like “we are taking our country back by any means necessary” or “protecting America for the ‘real’ Americans.” For this is coded language for intolerance.
I am proud that, in Colorado, while we have had our share of injustice—consider the Sand Creek Massacre, for example—we have also worked to advance the equal and fair treatment of everyone. During World War II, Governor Ralph Carr, whose name is on the building where the Attorney General’s Office is housed, stood firmly against the internment of Japanese Americans, earning him the title of “The Principled Politician” (which is the name of his biography).[4] Governor Carr, citing the U.S. Constitution, knew the internment of Japanese Americans was illegal, and he spoke out against this bigotry in the name of national security. The U.S. Supreme Court, in a now disavowed decision (the Korematsu case[5]), disagreed with Governor Carr and upheld President Roosevelt’s decision to intern Japanese Americans. Because of his stand—unpopular at the time—Governor Carr lost his next election. But history has celebrated his commitment to our constitutional values.
Let me celebrate the history of another Colorado Governor, whose name is less well remembered than Governor Carr: Governor Billy Adams.[6] Governor Adams served in the General Assembly in the 1920s when the Ku Klux Klan controlled Colorado. After he put together a coalition to block their agenda, the Klan-backed coalition in the House of Representatives retaliated against Adams by seeking to withhold funding for the Alamosa State Normal School, which is now known as Adams State, named for Billy Adams. Adams refused to be intimidated or cede to the Klan’s white supremacist agenda. Instead, he ran successfully to serve as Colorado Governor and pushed the Klan out of Colorado.
II. The State of Immigration Law
Much of immigration law is not governed by state laws but by federal laws. But because of the lawless and reckless actions of this administration, as a State Attorney General’s Office we find ourselves on the frontlines of many issues involving immigration law. Let me discuss a few of them with you today.
As I noted above, we live in a time of rising demonization of immigrants. But the dehumanization of others is not a new phenomenon. Take, for example, the 1857 Dred Scott case.[7] In that decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Black American, Dred Scott, could not be a citizen and could not hold the rights that come with citizenship. At the time, citing the Declaration of Independence’s commitment that everyone was created equal, Abraham Lincoln decried the decision.[8] After the Civil War, Congress and the American people overruled the Dred Scott case by adopting the Fourteenth Amendment and, in Section 1, specified that anyone born in the United States (and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”) is a citizen. Later, the Supreme Court confirmed that this clause applies even to the children of non-citizens, regardless of whether such people are in the U.S. under a granted status or without documentation or authorization.[9]
In January 2025, we witnessed this demonization—and lawlessness—in action as President Trump attempted to subvert the U.S. Constitution with a stroke of a pen through an executive order purporting to end the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of “birthright citizenship.”[10] That order would apply, if allowed to go into effect, to harm U.S. born children of those with H-1B visas, of Dreamers who have known no home but the U.S., and of those here with no legal authorization. It would mean thousands of babies born each year who otherwise would have been citizens will instead be stripped of their constitutional citizenship and lose their rights to fully and fairly be a part of American society as a citizen with all its benefits and privileges. And if the practice were changed, it would impose a new and major burden on all parents to demonstrate their child’s citizenship. Colorado, and a coalition of states, challenged this action as harmful to many Coloradans and illegal.[11] In a parallel case, a judge ruled from the bench, calling the executive order the most unconstitutional action he had ever seen, asking “where were the lawyers” when this action was decided upon.[12]
Last year, when the Supreme Court first heard oral arguments in the birthright citizenship case, the Trump administration’s refusal to concede that it would even follow circuit precedent on this issue made plain that its goal was to make it as difficult as possible for birthright citizens to enjoy and exercise their constitutional protections in spite of the law and Constitution.[13] And it merits emphasis that, during this oral argument, there was scarcely a word to justify the President’s action, which involved breaking his oath of office on his first day. Rather, the critical question was whether this unlawful action would only be remedied one case at a time as opposed to through a universal injunction.[14]
As this litigation continued, the Supreme Court is now, once again, considering the validity of this order in a case brought by a class of children who would lose citizenship, Trump v. Barbara. As I explained in an amicus brief filed in the case alongside other state attorneys general,[15] the Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld birthright citizenship, regardless of the immigration status of the baby’s parents. The attempt to undo this promise of our Constitution demonstrates President Trump’s hostility for our Constitution and the rule of law. In addition to harming hundreds of thousands of residents, the order significantly harms the states too, including by jeopardizing critical federal funding for programs like Medicaid and foster care services that rely on residents’ citizenship status. Even more alarming, although the order Trump signed indicates it would only apply to babies born after certain date, there is no reason to believe the Trump administration will stop there if a court accepts its theories. The citizenship of countless Americans could be called into question, including those accorded birthright citizenship decades ago. It is essential that the Supreme Court act as a check on this President’s lawless actions by blocking this order.
In another lawless intimidation effort, President Trump also said he would consider cutting off funding for states that did not support federal immigration enforcement efforts and would prosecute officials who decline to do so. For Colorado, this threat is quite real, as we were one of three states sued by the Trump administration for our state’s basic stance that immigration is a federal responsibility and the federal government cannot commandeer our law enforcement and other resources to engage in immigration enforcement. In Colorado, we have, in many communities, a shortage of law enforcement officers to serve the needs of communities. Having a state policy that Colorado law enforcement sticks to law enforcement is a sound one, as it also sends a message to community members that calling law enforcement will not jeopardize any family members who are undocumented. It is also a constitutional one because, under the Tenth Amendment, the federal government cannot coerce our state to do its bidding. Just recently, we prevailed on that ground, with a federal judge dismissing the Trump administration’s challenge to Colorado’s policy as a violation of our state’s sovereignty.[16]
Another appalling action by this administration is to take sweeping actions that indiscriminately harm immigrants and undermine established processes for rational and reasonable immigration enforcement. There are, for example, over one million people who have gone through the legal process and were denied any basis for staying in the United States.[17] A focus on this group, or on those without status who have committed violent crimes, would be an appropriate focus of federal immigration enforcement. Yet the sweeping actions by the Trump administration are not targeted and rather are intended to intimidate and create widespread fear among the broad immigrant community. This trend is made even more disturbing by the excessive force and other unlawful conduct we have seen by federal agents in carrying out these actions, including the tragic killing of Renée Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents. To help ensure accountability for this type of misconduct by federal agents, my office launched a new complaint form where Coloradans can report incidents. And just last month, a Colorado prosecutor filed charges against an immigration officer for assaulting a protestor.[18] In Colorado, we will continue to stand against unlawful actions that harm Coloradans.
Let me tell you another story that has come to my office about a person, who I will call Jack, who is a police officer and as of last summer was being targeted by the Department of Homeland Security in a cruel fashion. Jack and his wife immigrated to the United States legally, making Colorado their home, and immediately applied for permanent resident status. Despite completing his paperwork and following up with immigration authorities regularly, Jack was approaching two and a half years of waiting for his application to be processed. Alarmingly, despite years of doing things by the book and maintaining legal status, Jack was informed that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement labeled him as an “illegal alien.” Now he and his family—including his two young sons, who were born in the U.S. and are American citizens—live in daily uncertainty about whether they will be allowed to remain in the country they call home, where Jack protects and serves his community each day as a law enforcement officer. Understandably, this is frightening for them, and others like them who wish only to serve their communities and raise their families.
Let me touch on a point that I am deeply outraged about and must be discussed more regularly—the violations of our nation’s commitment to “due process of law” for all persons in the United States. Our President has said that he does not know if this constitutional commitment applies to non-citizens. Let me make this as clear as possible—the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, by its plainly written terms, applies to all persons. I take my oath to defend our Constitution seriously. I expect all who take that oath to do the same.
It is worth making another point about due process of law. Even if you wanted to accord due process only to citizens, or only those with a certain status, you need a legal process to evaluate whether the person being picked up and threatened with removal to another country is a citizen. I am heartened that the U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 7-2, has refused to allow the Trump administration to invoke the Alien Enemies Act in an end run around due process.[19] I know that I speak for many of my fellow attorneys general that we will defend due process vigilantly, as it is a foundation of our democratic republic.
Let me also say a word about the First Amendment. In multiple actions, targeted at law firms, universities, and foreign students studying here, there is an effort to punish people for protected speech. Like due process, the First Amendment protection of speech is a foundation of our republic and one that we must defend. It is, stated simply, un-American and dangerous to allow this policy of punishing or targeting anyone for their speech.[20] Whether I agree with someone or find their speech deeply offensive, I believe in our First Amendment’s policy that the cure for harmful speech is more speech.[21]
III. The Future of Immigration Policy
At this challenging moment for our republic, it is a difficult time for the spirit of e pluribus unum. Here in Colorado, I have seen a powerful spirit of inclusion and unity again and again. Take, for example, the experience in the wake of the devastating Club Q mass shooting in Colorado Springs in November 2022. In response, communities from different traditions came together to stand for a basic principle—a hate crime against any of us, in that case against the LGBTQ community, is an attack on all of us. And we saw that same spirit after an attack on Jews in Boulder on June 1.
It is important that we bear witness to the growing hate in our society and respond by creating bonds of humanity where we all can flourish and live—as President Washington put it—safely under our vine and fig tree. To do so effectively, we must not give hate oxygen and instead work to repair our world where too many feel lonely, isolated, and angry—and open to bigoted appeals that promise shared bonds built from hate.
The premise of listening to others is that they are worth listening to. That’s what e pluribus unum is about—an inclusive republic. Consider the enduring teaching of President Lincoln after the Civil War in his Second Inaugural Address: “With malice toward none with charity for all with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right let us strive on to finish the work we are in to bind up the nation’s wounds . . . and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
I believe in inclusion not just as the morally right stance, but as a smart policy for our nation. Our nation is rejuvenated by immigrants like my grandparents. Our universities are stronger and our research laboratories benefit by students from around the world coming here to work and study. And many successful companies are founded by immigrants or children of immigrants who contribute to our nation’s economic success.
I remain a believer that we will, at some point and through extensive and persistent effort, achieve a rational immigration reform plan. It is unthinkable to me that we will be deporting Dreamers and it is appalling that it takes three years or more before an application for asylum for a refugee is able to be acted upon.[22] Sadly, inaction by the current and past Congresses means that this type of immigration reform—that was close to passage just as recently as a few years ago—remains only on the drawing board. We must keep working towards that vision, knowing that our nation’s future depends on us finding a better path forward.
* * *
Thank you for working to ensure Colorado’s communities are strong, welcoming, and better together. I know that we live at a time of understandable fear and hardship for many immigrants like Jack, just trying to find a path forward for him and his family. Together, we can work to live up to the example of Governor Ralph Carr and Governor Billy Adams, defend our constitutional freedoms, and recognize that our nation’s motto of e pluribus unum is worth fighting for.
[1] George Washington, Letter to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island (Aug. 18, 1790), in The Papers of George Washington, Presidential Series, vol. 6, at 284–86 (Mark A. Mastromarino ed., Univ. Press of Va. 1996), available at https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-06-02-0135 (opens new tab).
[2] Id.
[3] Phil Weiser, Prepared Remarks: The Courage to Bear Witness: Standing Together to Create Bonds of Humanity, Colo. Att’y Gen. (Sept. 25, 2024), https://coag.gov/blog-post/prepared-remarks-the-courage-to-bear-witness-standing-together-to-create-bonds-of-humanity-sept-25-2024/.
[4] Adam Schrager, The Principled Politician: The Ralph Carr Story (2008).
[5] Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944).
[6] For more details on Billy Adams, see this writeup: https://www.coloradovirtuallibrary.org/resource-sharing/state-pubs-blog/colorados-governors-william-h-adams/ (opens new tab).
[7] Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857).
[8] Abraham Lincoln, Speech on the Dred Scott Decision (June 26, 1857), Teaching Am. Hist., https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/speech-on-the-dred-scott-decision-3/ (opens new tab).
[9] United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898).
[10] Executive Order 14160, Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship, Federal Register Vol. 90, No. 18, January 29, 2025, pp. 8449-8450.
[11] New Jersey v. Trump, No. 1:25-cv-10139 (D. Mass. Jan. 21, 2025).
[12] KUOW, Seattle Judge temporarily blocks Trump executive order on birthright citizenship (Jan. 2025), https://www.kuow.org/stories/seattle-judge-temporarily-blocks-trump-executive-order-on-birthright-citizenship (opens new tab).
[13] Amanda Frost, The Question the Trump Administration Couldn’t Answer About Birthright Citizenship, Atlantic (May 16, 2025), https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/birthright-citizenship-injunction/682830/ (opens new tab).
[14] Id.
[15] Brief of New Jersey et al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents, Trump v. Barbara, No. 25365 (Feb. 26, 2026), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-365/399351/20260226112123096_25-365acNewJersey.pdf (PDF).
[16] Seth Klamann and Elliott Wenzler, Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit against Colorado and Denver over immigration laws, Denver Post (Mar. 31, 2026), https://www.denverpost.com/2026/03/31/colorado-trump-lawsuit-dismissed-immigration-laws/ (opens new tab).
[17] New York Times, Asylum in America, by the Numbers (Nov. 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/21/us/politics/migrant-crisis-border-asylum.html (opens new tab).
[18] The Associated Press, Immigration officer in Colorado charged with assault after protest outside ICE facility, DA says, The Colorado Sun (Apr. 22, 2026), https://coloradosun.com/2026/04/22/ice-agent-arrest-durango-assault-charge/ (opens new tab).
[19] A. A. R. P. v. Trump, 605 U.S. ___ (2025).
[20] David French, Don’t Fool Yourself Into Thinking It Will Stop With Columbia, New York Times (Mar. 16, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/opinion/trump-khalil-columbia-speech.html (opens new tab).
[21] Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 377 (1927) (Brandeis, J., concurring) (“If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”).
[22] Asylum in America, by the Numbers, supra note 17.