imported post
The actual text of the 18 USC 922 on this matter reads:
(the prohibition shall not apply) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license
Upon first examination it is clear that the State in which the school is located must "license" the individual. But Colorado law says that a license issued by another state which meets certain criteria (residency in the issuing state) shall "be valid in this state in all respects as a permit issued pursuant to this part 2" (CRS 18-12-213). In other words, permits that Colorado recognizes are just as valid as a Colorado permit itself. Or, Colorado grants the same "license" to recognized out-of-state permits as it does to it's own permits. That would seem to refute the idea that only a Colorado permit gets you around the 1000' foot zone. According to this logic, any resident permit that Colorado recognizes would nullify the prohibition.
However, there is a question of exactly what the "license" issued by the "State" allows the individual to do with it. CRS 18-12-2XX only grants authority to carry a "concealed handgun". Since there is no state issued license to carry openly in Colorado, you can certainly make an argument that a CO CCW does NOT get you around the federal prohibition if you are carrying openly.
If there is a state that issues a license to carry a handgun, and open carry is illegal in that state without it, you could even make an argument that a license issued from by that state, recognized by Colorado, gets you around the federal school zone where a Colorado permit does not!
Inevitably this leads you to question the authority of the federal statue to begin with. Even the statue itself is poorly worded. For example 18 USC 922 says:
It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
So on one hand the individual would have to "know" they were in a school zone, but on the other hand they could be in violation of this law even if they were outside of the school zone, but
believed they were inside it. Pretty ridiculous. Lastly you have the entire statue (and most of invasive federal law for that matter) relying on a total perversion of the interstate commerce clause, but that is a matter for a different debate.
So what's the conclusion? I don't think there is one. The laws aren't entirely clear and there a number of issues up to the courts to decide.
As a practical matter I know that I have OCed within a school zone in front of local LEOs before and I haven't had an issue. I think you have to rely on the probability that 99% of local/state LEOs are not federally sworn.