Two initiatives to limit how long Colorado’s appellate judges can serve could immediately end the career of Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey and six Court of Appeals judges, lawyers and legal analysts said Tuesday.
One initiative, No. 75, whose wording was approved by the Colorado Supreme Court on Monday, would limit the judges and justices to 12 years in their positions.
The second initiative, No. 90, whose wording is currently being considered by the Supreme Court, would limit them to 10 years.
Former state Senate President John Andrews, the sponsor of both initiatives, said late Tuesday that Initiative No. 75 would not shorten the terms of incumbent judges. But he said that Initiative 90 would have that effect.
“That is the clear meaning of the way 90 is worded,” Andrews said.
Andrews said if Initiative No. 90 is approved by the Supreme Court in the next few weeks, a steering committee would decide which of the two initiatives would be brought to the voters.
“It would depend on which one we think has the best chance of getting the signatures and obtaining approval of the voters,” Andrews said.
Approximately 68,000 signatures are needed to put an initiative before the voters in November.
In its ruling Monday, the Supreme Court said the language of Initiative No. 75 would be “prospective” rather than retroactive in nature, and wouldn’t cut short the terms of office of those currently serving as Court of Appeals judges or Supreme Court justices.
But the language of Initiative No. 90 is worded in such a way that the six Court of Appeals judges and Mullarkey would probably lose their jobs immediately, said Michael Valdez, the director of legislative relations for the Colorado Bar Association.
Although the Supreme Court ruled that the first initiative would not shorten the terms of sitting judges, Valdez contends it could.
“I don’t think it is crystal clear from their (the Supreme Court’s) opinion who is truly impacted by this measure,” Valdez said of Initiative No. 75.
The initiative approved Monday says that the terms of office for the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court shall be four years, no one on either court shall serve more than three terms in office, and that anyone who has served 12 years is not eligible for another term.
Mullarkey has been on the Supreme Court for 18 years.
At the Court of Appeals, both Jose D.L. Marquez and Janice Davidson have been there 17 years; Sandra Rothenberg, 15 years; Daniel Taubman, 13 years; and Arthur Roy and James Casebolt, for 12 years each.
Chris Little, Denver Bar Association president, said Tuesday that in potential jeopardy are “perhaps six of the brightest minds we have seen on our Court of Appeals in a number of years.”
“I think those judges collectively write very good opinions. They are usually just well-balanced,” Little said.
He said the judges bring such great experience and such temperament that “they would be sorely missed.”
Little said that if Initiative No. 90 passes muster as did Initiative No. 75, potentially five of the seven Supreme Court justices could lose their jobs because of Initiative No. 90’s 10-year term limit.
Staff writer Howard Pankratz can be reached at 303-820-1939 or hpankratz@denverpost.com.
