Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Court motion seeks to stop enforcement of Amend. 41

Ethics measure foes cite its 'chilling' effect

Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News

Published March 13, 2007 at midnight

Text size  

More Colorado Government

More stories »

A group of Coloradans challenging a new ethics measure asked a court Monday to halt its enforcement until their lawsuit is heard.

The motion for a preliminary injunction against Amendment 41 was no surprise. The question is whether the court will act on it before the legislature votes on two bills related to the measure or adjourns May 9.

The voter-approved amendment in part bans gifts worth $50 or more to government employees and their families.

Although the measure was aimed at reining in gifts to elected officials from lobbyists, it has raised a variety of questions, including whether children of government workers can accept some types of scholarships.

Attorney Mike Feeley, who was hired by Amendment 41 supporters to help draft implementing legislation known as House Bill 1304, said even if the injunction is granted, it would not impact that bill or a related one.

"It changes the political dynamic, but not the legal implications," Feeley said. "And it's the long way of getting to the people who will ultimately decide this issue - the Supreme Court."

The House might take up HB 1304, by Rep. Rosemary Marshall, D-Denver, as early as today.

The bill defines terms in Amendment 41, but critics say it goes too far in trying to address the unintended consequences of the amendment.

A companion measure asks the state Supreme Court to issue an interrogatory on whether the legislation is constitutional.

The suit against Amendment 41, launched in February, and the motion for the injunction were filed by former Supreme Court Justice Jean Dubrofsky and attorney Doug Friednash.

Their suit in Denver District Court says the measure is unconstitutional because it has a "chilling" effect on free speech and association.

"Overly broad and vague restrictions such as those imposed by Amendment 41 must be challenged," Dubrofsky said in a statement.

Jenny Flanagan, director of Colorado Common Cause, which helped put Amendment 41 on the ballot, said "wild interpretations of the ethics law are not consistent with the measure's language" and called on lawmakers to support HB 1304.