If made law, House Bill 25-1291 would set various mandates for rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft, including requirements that all rides be recorded, background checks be conducted on drivers every six months, and individuals convicted of assault, harassment, kidnapping, menacing, domestic violence or impersonating a driver be banned from driving for the platforms.
The bill would also require companies to place drivers on probation when they're accused of serious crimes, establish certain policies to prevent account sharing and prohibit drivers from offering passengers food or beverages.
Uber says the policy puts too many "major technical and financial burdens" on the company with "no clear safety benefit," opening the platform up to lawsuits if drivers violate the new regulations.
"HB 25-1291 is a deeply flawed proposal, which if implemented could leave us no choice but [to] cease operations in Colorado," says Uber Spokesperson Gabriela Condarco-Quesada. "We support real, evidence-based safety policy – not legislation that checks a box but fails to deliver. As written, this bill not only misses the mark, it risks doing more harm than good."
Uber argues its safety features are already adequate, pointing to the app's emergency help button, optional verification code system to identify drivers, and a feature to share trip details and location with friends or family.
State Representative Jenny Willford says the statistics disagree.
There were 12,522 reported sexual assault incidents involving Uber passengers and drivers between 2017 and 2022 in the United States, according to the company's safety reports. While the frequency of overall incidents has decreased, the frequency of reported rapes has remained consistent in each report since 2017.
Willford was inspired to bring HB 1291 forward because of her personal experience with the issue. Willford says she was sexually assaulted by a Lyft driver in February 2024. Willford is now suing Lyft, arguing that the company fails to take reasonable steps to prevent the sexual assault of its passengers.
"The bottom line is one sexual assault is one too many," she says. "For years, Uber has checked the box on safety, but time after time failed to deliver for victims. It’s clear Uber won’t stand up for safety, so they can continue to maximize profits rather than address the horrible incidents that change the lives of riders and drivers forever."
Willford says legislators have worked with Uber for months on extensive amendments to the bill at the company's request, calling its threat to ditch the state "a cynical and disheartening move by a multi-billion dollar company to turn their back on survivors rather than implement real safety measures."
If Uber makes good on its threat, Colorado will be the first state abandoned by the platform, the company claims — but Colorado is far from the first place to face this ultimatum.
Uber Has Threatened to Leave Places Before
Uber has promised to leave numerous cities, states and countries that dared to impose regulations the company disagreed with, to varying results.In 2017, Uber said it would exit Seattle after the city let rideshare drivers unionize, though the company stayed put. Similarly, Uber threatened to leave Houston in 2016 if the city would not remove a requirement for drivers to receive fingerprint background checks; the city refused and Uber remained. On a smaller scale, Uber vowed to end service to the Phoenix airport due to new fees in 2020, but didn't follow through when the fees began.
Sometimes the company's threats can lead to concessions, however. Uber pledged to leave Minnesota in May after Minneapolis passed wage increases for drivers. Two weeks later, the company agreed to stay when the state stepped in to reduce the pay increases. The year before, Minnesota's governor vetoed a similar wage increase proposal over concerns of losing the company.
The company threatened to exit New Jersey and Chicago in 2016 due to proposals to require fingerprinting for rideshare drivers. Those proposals ultimately failed. (Notably, Uber still operates in New York City even though the city mandates fingerprinting.) In 2020, Uber said it would halt service in California because a judge ruled the company must reclassify its drivers as employees; an appeals court granted Uber a temporary reprieve and the state later passed a ballot measure to keep drivers as independent contractors.
Instances in which the company has actually left jurisdictions are far rarer. Uber pulled out of Austin in 2016 when the city began mandating fingerprint background checks for drivers. The company returned one year later after the Texas Legislature passed a law overriding Austin's rules, eliminating the requirement.
The company left Barcelona, Spain, in 2019 due to various new government regulations, but returned in 2021, accepting the new regulations and even reportedly letting taxis use its software for free as a show of good faith. Also outside of the United States, Uber has threatened to leave Quebec, Canada, and the entire countries of Austria and Kenya, though the platform remains active in those locations today.
Will Uber Actually Leave Colorado?
Only time will tell what the company will do and whether the bill will pass at all as HB 25-1291 works through the legislative process.The bill received broad bipartisan support from the House of Representatives, passing the chamber in a 59-6 vote on April 16. It cleared its first Senate vote by a much smaller margin, advancing through the Senate Business, Labor & Technology Committee on April 22 by just one vote, 4-3. During that committee hearing, multiple Uber representatives spoke in opposition to the bill, calling it "impossible" to comply with.
The legislative session ends on May 7, giving sponsors just two more weeks to secure support from the majority of the chamber. The bill will then need approval from Governor Jared Polis.
While Uber has bluffed before, the company has already followed through on a different threat against Colorado. Unhappy with the state due to new laws passed last year requiring gig driving companies to disclose more payment information to drivers and riders, the company filed a lawsuit in January in an attempt to prevent the laws from taking effect. A District Court judge denied that request.
If Uber does pull out of the state, Coloradans won't be left without a rideshare platform. A spokesperson for Lyft says the company is not currently planning on fleeing Colorado, despite its concerns about the proposed law.
"We believe there is a compromise that can be reached that would be beneficial for both riders and drivers," says Lyft spokesperson C.J. Macklin. "But there are still several aspects of the bill that would make implementation extremely problematic. At the very least, it would have a drastic, negative impact on those who use the platform in a way that does not help achieve the goal of the legislation."
Macklin says Lyft wants to work with state legislators on changes that "[address] these realities and [avoid] the unintended consequences the current version creates."
New competition is rising up, as well. Co-Op Colorado, a driver-owned rideshare app designed to raise pay and transparency for drivers, is relaunching this summer — just in time to catch the possible wave of former Uber riders if the law is passed in May.
