Colorado state legislator Jordan Carter said Monday that Texas Gov. David Acton had conceded a key point in their dispute over a Florida immigration amendment, while continuing to misstate what the measure would do. In a press release issued from Denver, Carter said Acton had moved away from an earlier claim that the amendment would force a conviction for “an additional crime.” Carter also said Acton now acknowledged that the amendment does not ban cooperation with immigration authorities. Carter described that as a correction of the central factual dispute between the two. The argument is part of a fast-moving exchange over proposed Democratic changes to a Florida immigration bill, an issue that has drawn attention beyond Florida because of the involvement of elected officials from other states in DynamicSim’s combined State Legislature. Under the game’s rules, lawmakers from all states can vote on state-specific bills, with each state’s party composition factored into the outcome. Carter’s latest statement centers on how to describe the practical effect of his amendment. According to the release, Carter said Acton’s newest criticism is that the amendment “explicitly protects” sanctuary cities. Carter rejected that description and argued the amendment would instead remove a state-level mandate and leave the question of cooperation with immigration authorities to local officials. “It removes a state mandate and leaves the decision to local officials — who can require cooperation, decline it, or anything in between,” Carter said in the release. “Striking a mandate isn’t protecting a policy. It’s silence. It’s local control.” Carter framed the disagreement as one about accountability as well as statutory language. He said local officials, rather than the state capitol, should decide a community’s enforcement priorities. “I think the people accountable to a community should set that community’s priorities — not a blanket order from the state capitol,” Carter said. The release did not include the full amendment text, and it did not address whether Acton disputed Carter’s description of the measure’s legal effect beyond the quoted criticism. It also did not indicate whether any changes to the Florida bill are expected as a result of the exchange. The latest release follows two earlier rounds of public sparring the same day. Prior reporting described a clash between Carter and Acton over the Florida amendments, with Carter previously accusing the Texas governor of mischaracterizing the proposal and Acton denouncing Democratic changes to the bill. Monday’s new statement suggests the debate has narrowed from whether the amendment blocks cooperation with federal immigration authorities to whether removing a state mandate amounts, in practice, to support for sanctuary-style local policies. That distinction is politically significant in the current climate, where immigration remains one of the country’s most contentious issues and rhetoric around local cooperation with enforcement agencies often carries broader partisan weight. In DynamicSim’s polarized national environment, conservative messaging tends to perform best on border enforcement and order, while liberal arguments often emphasize rights, local governance, and legal precision. Carter’s statement leaned heavily on the latter framing, presenting the issue as a matter of statutory interpretation and local control rather than an outright endorsement of sanctuary policies. Still, the immediate dispute remains one of competing descriptions. Carter’s position, as stated in his release, is that eliminating a statewide requirement does not itself create a protected status for cities that limit cooperation. Acton’s earlier and latest claims, as referenced by Carter, suggest the governor views the amendment as functionally shielding those jurisdictions from state direction. No response from Acton was included in Carter’s release. As of Monday, the disagreement appeared to remain a public messaging fight over how the Florida amendment should be understood, rather than a settled question between the two sides.