May 12

Federal appeals court to consider future of lawsuit over Colorado’s TABOR

Federal appeals court to consider future of lawsuit over Colorado’s TABOR

The 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requires that tax increases be approved by voters

Two women walk up the steps on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, on Oct. 16, 2018. (John Ingold, The Colorado Sun)

The Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will consider whether a long-running lawsuit challenging Colorado’s strict tax and spending limits as unconstitutional can proceed.

Colorado Politics reports that a nine-judge panel will consider on Monday a review of the lawsuit, which was filed in 2011 by group of elected officials.

The 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requires that tax increases be approved by voters. It also requires the state to refund tax revenue that exceeds a figure determined by a formula based on inflation and population growth.

To continue reading this story, please click (HERE):

May 12

9 federal judges set to decide fate of TABOR repeal lawsuit

9 federal judges set to decide fate of TABOR repeal lawsuit

Hickenlooper submits his final state budget, but it may not last long
Exactly 10 years after a group of local and state elected officials first filed a legal challenge to Colorado’s most celebrated — and vilified — constitutional provision, the entirety of the Denver-based federal appeals court will now consider whether to pull the plug on that fight.

On Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, which hears appeals from Colorado and five surrounding states, will hold a rare all-judges hearing, known as an “en banc” review, of the lawsuit seeking to overturn the state’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Although appellate courts typically issue decisions in panels of three judges, the 10th Circuit in October granted en banc review of the TABOR case.

Such hearings are highly atypical: from October 2018 through September 2019, the 10th Circuit only heard one case en banc out of more than 1,100.

There are 12 authorized judgeships on the 10th Circuit that require presidential nomination and U.S. Senate confirmation. However, only nine judges will participate in the en banc panel: five who were nominees of Democratic presidents and four who were Republican nominees.

The diminished number is the result of two Clinton administration appointees retiring from active status earlier this year. One of them, Senior Judge Mary Beck Briscoe, will join the en banc hearing. In addition, of the 10 remaining active judges, Scott M. Matheson Jr., a nominee of President Barack Obama, and Joel M. Carson III, a nominee of Donald Trump, have each recused themselves.

TABOR, a 1992 constitutional amendment, limits the amount of revenue the state can collect and spend, and requires voter approval for new taxes and tax rate increases. The amendment also provided a mechanism to refund revenue collections to taxpayers in excess of a formula based on inflation and population growth. Colorado refunded nearly $3.5 billion in the quarter-century since TABOR’s passage.

To continue reading this story, please click (HERE):

May 10

Federal judges to hear TABOR repeal, appellate court deals with censured judge

COURT CRAWL | Federal judges to hear TABOR repeal, appellate court deals with censured judge

Courthouse close with Justice inscribed
Welcome to Court Crawl, Colorado Politics’ roundup of news from the third branch of government. Today will feature a rare all-judges hearing in Colorado’s federal appellate court, plus the state’s Court of Appeals last week issued guidance for parties who appeared before a now-censured judge.

TABOR saga continues

This morning, the entire roster of judges on the Denver-based federal appeals court will hear oral arguments in the decade-long lawsuit over whether to declare Colorado’s 1992 Taxpayer Bill of Rights unconstitutional. Today’s hearing likely won’t end the lawsuit: the question before the judges is whether political subdivisions, like school districts or boards of county commissioners, have legal standing to sue for TABOR’s repeal.

•  Listen live at 10 a.m. here.

COURT CRAWL | Federal judges to hear TABOR repeal, appellate court deals with censured judge | Courts | coloradopolitics.com

Feb 07

Appeals Court Rules Kerr, et al, Have Standing In TABOR Lawsuit

Appeals Rules Standing OK_7.22.19 by North Suburban Republican Forum on Scribd

Feb 07

Court Wait Until After Ballot Initiative

Court_wait Until After Ballot Initiative_12.13.19 by North Suburban Republican Forum on Scribd

Feb 07

Court Order Vacates Appellate Panel Decision

Court Order Vacates Appellate Panel_10.14.20 by North Suburban Republican Forum on Scribd

Feb 06

Appeals Court Rules Standing OK

FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

PUBLISH
July 22, 2019

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________
ANDY KERR, Colorado State
Representative; NORMA V. ANDERSON;
JANE M. BARNES, member Jefferson
County Board of Education; ELAINE GANTZ BERMAN, member State Board of Education; ALEXANDER E. BRACKEN; WILLIAM K. BREGAR, member Pueblo District 70 Board of Education; BOB BRIGGS, Westminster No. 17-1192
City Councilman; BRUCE W.
BRODERINS, member Weld County
District 6 Board of Education; TRUDY B.
BROWN; JOHN C. BUECHNER, Ph.D.,
Lafayette City Councilman; STEPHEN A.
BURKHOLDER; RICHARD L. BYYNY,
M.D.; LOIS COURT, Colorado State
Representative; THERESA L. CRATER;
ROBIN CROSSAN, member Steamboat
Springs RE-2 Board of Education;
RICHARD E. FERDINANDSEN;
STEPHANIE GARCIA, member Pueblo
City Board of Education; KRISTI
HARGROVE; DICKEY LEE
HULLINGHORST, Colorado State
Representative; NANCY JACKSON,
Arapahoe County Commissioner; CLAIRE
LEVY, Colorado State Representative;
MARGARET MARKERT, Aurora City
Councilwoman, a/k/a Molly Markert; MEGAN J. MASTEN; MICHAEL MERRIFIELD; MARCELLA L.
MORRISON, a/k/a Marcy L. Morrison;
JOHN P. MORSE, Colorado State Senator;
PAT NOONAN; BEN PEARLMAN,
Boulder County Commissioner;
Continue reading

Feb 06

Court Wait Until After Ballot Initiative

Appellate Case: 17-1192 Document: 010110274622 Date Filed: 12/13/2019 Page: 1
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS _________________________________ FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker December 13, 2019Tenth Circuit
ANDY KERR, Colorado State Clerk of Court
Representative, et al.,
Plaintiffs – Appellants,

v. No. 17-1192
(D.C. No. 1:11-CV-01350-RM-NYW)
JARED POLIS, Governor of Colorado in (D. Colo.) his official capacity,

Defendant – Appellee.

——————————

COLORADO ASSOCIATION OF
SCHOOL BOARDS AND COLORADO
ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL
EXECUTIVES, et al.,

Amici Curiae.
_________________________________
ORDER
_________________________________
Before BRISCOE, SEYMOUR, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the appellee’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc of our decision in Kerr v. Polis, 930 F.3d 1190 (10th Cir. 2019). A response to the Petition is also on file.
Upon review of these pleadings we note that a ballot initiative has been filed with the Colorado Secretary of State that proposes a vote at the next general election to repeal

Appellate Case: 17-1192 Document: 010110274622 Date Filed: 12/13/2019 Page: 2
Section 20 of Article X of the Colorado Constitution, the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). In June 2019, the Colorado Supreme Court held that the “initiative comprises a single subject within the meaning of the Colorado Constitution,” and returned the initiative to the Title Board to “set[] a title, ballot title, and submission clause.” In re Ballot Title #3, 2019 CO 57, ¶ 40. The initiative is currently pending review by the Colorado Supreme Court on a second appeal raising questions about the appropriate title for the initiative. Continue reading

Feb 06

Court Order Vacates Appellate Panel

FILED
United States Court of Appeals
PUBLISH Tenth Circuit

October 14, 2020
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Christopher M. Wolpert
Clerk of Court
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________
ANDY KERR, Colorado State
Representative; NORMA V. ANDERSON;
JANE M. BARNES, member Jefferson
County Board of Education; ELAINE GANTZ BERMAN, member State Board of Education; ALEXANDER E. BRACKEN; WILLIAM K. BREGAR, member Pueblo District 70 Board of
Education; BOB BRIGGS, Westminster No. 17-1192
City Councilman; BRUCE W. (D.C. No. 1:11-CV-01350-RM-NYW)
BRODERIUS, member Weld County (D. Colo.)
District 6 Board of Education; TRUDY B.
BROWN; JOHN C. BUECHNER, Ph.D.,
Lafayette City Councilman; STEPHEN A.
BURKHOLDER; RICHARD L. BYYNY,
M.D.; LOIS COURT, Colorado State
Representative; THERESA L. CRATER;
ROBIN CROSSAN, member Steamboat
Springs RE-2 Board of Education;
RICHARD E. FERDINANDSEN;
STEPHANIE GARCIA, member Pueblo
City Board of Education; KRISTI
HARGROVE; DICKEY LEE
HULLINGHORST, Colorado State
Representative; NANCY JACKSON,
Arapahoe County Commissioner; CLAIRE
LEVY, Colorado State Representative;
MARGARET MARKERT, Aurora City
Councilwoman, AKA Molly Markert; MEGAN J. MASTEN; MICHAEL MERRIFIELD; MARCELLA L.
MORRISON, AKA Marcy L. Morrison;
JOHN P. MORSE, Colorado State Senator;
PAT NOONAN; BEN PEARLMAN,
Boulder County Commissioner;
Continue reading

Jan 24

Opinion: Politicians’ challenge to Colorado’s TABOR is without merit

For almost three decades, TABOR has been a godsend for Colorado taxpayers.

2:55 AM MST on Jan 24, 2021

Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights is under attack once again, this time by the very politicians whose actions TABOR is intended to check.

A lawsuit filed by state legislators and some local elected officials has been wending its way through the federal courts since 2011. They seek to overturn the voter-enacted TABOR amendment to the Colorado constitution, which requires voter approval before state and local legislative bodies can impose or raise taxes.

The lawmakers’ case rests on the dubious idea that by denying legislators a free hand on matters of taxing and spending, TABOR denies Coloradans a republican form of government, in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

It’s a specious, self-serving argument that ignores more than a century of case law and practical political experience with voter initiatives and referendums, in Colorado and elsewhere.

The case will now be heard by the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, although it seems likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually get the final word.

It’s a complicated case involving questions of standing — who has the right to bring a case to court — and whether constitutional guarantees of a republican form of government include the actions of political subdivisions such as school boards.

To continue reading this story, please click (HERE):