Subject: Colorado Supreme Court applies single subject rule to an initiative
From: "ban@richardwinger.com" <richardwinger@yahoo.com>
Date: 6/12/2006, 2:31 PM
To: election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Reply-to:
ban@richardwinger.com



 Colo. Court Rules Against Ballot Measure

 By JON SARCHE
 AP

 DENVER (AP) - The Colorado Supreme Court ruled
Monday that a proposal to 
deny most state services to illegal immigrants
cannot appear on the November 
ballot.

The proposed constitutional amendment, promoted by
Defend Colorado Now, 
violated a state constitutional requirement that
initiatives deal with only one 
subject, the court said in a 5-2 opinion.

According to the ruling, Defend Colorado Now touted
the possibility of 
reducing taxpayer expenditures by restricting
illegal immigrants' access to 
services, as well as the goal of restricting access
to services.

Proponents, including former Democratic Gov. Dick
Lamm, already had begun 
gathering petition signatures to get the measure on
the ballot, and the state 
Title Board approved the measure's language this
spring. But Monday's ruling may 
mean the issue is dead for this year because a key
deadline for the November 
ballot has passed.

"This is outrageous judicial activism, Exhibit A in
how courts disregard 
precedent to reach a political result," Lamm said in
a statement. "This isn't law, 
it is raw, naked politics."

Activist Manolo Gonzalez-Estay had challenged the
measure in court after the 
Title Board rejected his request to reconsider its
approval of the 
initiative's language.

Fred Elbel, director of Defend Colorado Now, did not
immediately return a 
call seeking comment Monday.

The measure would not stop the state from paying for
federally mandated 
services such as public education or emergency
medical care. But Elbel has said it 
would prevent illegal immigrants from receiving
welfare and in-state college 
tuition.

In a dissent, Justices Nathan Coats and Nancy Rice
expressed concern that the 
court's majority decision was influenced by the
motives of the measure's 
proponents and by its potential effects.

They said the court has inconsistently applied the
single-subject 
requirement, giving justices "unfettered discretion
to either approve or disapprove 
virtually any popularly initiated ballot measure at
will."
 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com