Colorado Supreme Court (Photo from www.courts.state.co.us)
Each Supreme Court Justice in Colorado faces a Retention Vote every ten years. For four of the six sitting Justices, 2010 could be a tougher than usual year for re-election.
Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey and Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez & Nancy Rice will see their names on this November’s ballot, assuming that each Justice declares their intention to seek retention by May. The four Justices were all appointed by Democratic Colorado Governor Roy Romer, and each has already successfully passed a retention vote once before.
Conservative activists began a campaign last year to unseat the majority of the Colorado Supreme Court, and their activities will make a typically passive election procedure more noticeable in 2010. Complaints about a liberal bias amongst the Democratically-appointed majority have been brewing for the last decade, and will surely come to a head in May when Justices will be expected to explain their decisions in detail before the public. The retention battle will likely take a decidedly partisan tone.
Among the list of complaints leveled by conservative activists such as Clear the Bench Colorado are a 2009 ruling that purportedly violated the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), and a 2006 ruling against Initiative 55 set forth by the anti-immigration group Defend Colorado Now.
The 2009 ruling favored a Democratically-backed law that halted a mandated decrease in property taxes, instead funneling the collected taxes towards funding for public schools. The 2006 ruling loosely applied the so-called “single subject” guideline for Initiatives on the
Republican Attorney General of Colorado John Suthers was recently quoted as saying that he would vote against retaining Mullarkey, Bender & Martinez, but declined to restate or further his remarks when pressed.
Comments
Appreciate your coverage of this extremely important statewide election - however, I'd like to take the opportunity to clear up a few inaccuracies in the article.
First off, the 2006 ruling against Initiative 55 is NOT among the "list of complaints leveled by Clear the Bench Colorado" - although it may be added to the list at a future date.
The "core four" cases cited as grounds for opposing the retention of the four justices subject to retention are the aforementioned 2009 "Mill Levy Tax Freeze" ruling, plus a 2008 case enabling taxes to masquerade as "fees" for the purpose of evading the TABOR voter approval requirement, the "Telluride Land Grab" eminent domain abuse/property rights case, and the 2003 judicial usurpation of the Legislature's authority to conduct Congressional redistricting.
(All of these cases are prominently featured on the CTBC website www dot clearthebenchcolorado dot org).
Continuing comment:
Also, the 2009 "Mill Levy Tax Freeze" case did not simply uphold a law that "halted a mandated decrease in property taxes" - the law locked in a perpetual increase in property taxes by setting a permanent (high) percentage rate, resulting in repeated increases, and evading a constitutional requirement for prior voter approval of tax increases.
The opinion in that case also invented a new loophole that has enabled additional tax increases - beginning with the tobacco tax increase passed in 2009, and continuing with an entire package (the "Dirty Dozen") of tax increase bills at the beginning of the 2010 legislative session; ALL in evasion of prior voter approval, as mandated by the Colorado Constitution (Taxpayer's Bill of Rights).
The Colorado Supreme Court has demonstrated a consistent pattern of disregard for clear constitutional language restricting government power (particularly approval for tax increases) and undermines the rights of Colorado citizens. Vo
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!