Colorado’s tough new ethics law suffered a significant blow Thursday when a judge issued a temporary injunction stopping enforcement of Amendment 41 – a decision Gov. Bill Ritter plans to appeal.
Denver District Judge Christina Habas’ decision to suspend Amendment 41 came in response to a request by a group of elected officials, government workers and nonprofit groups that said the ethics-in-government law was overly broad, invaded private lives and violated the First Amendment.
“I find that the Plaintiffs’ fears are well-founded, and that their speech, association and petitioning rights have been chilled,” Habas wrote.
The amendment, passed by more than 60 percent of voters last year, bans lawmakers from taking anything from lobbyists and prohibits government workers and their families from receiving gifts worth more than $50, except on special occasions.
Opponents said it prevented them from accepting scholarships, inheritances or personal gifts.
State lawmakers’ attempt to clarify that the ban on gifts applies only when there is a breach of public trust for private gain did not “cure the problems associated with Amendment,” Habas wrote.
Doug Friednash, the plaintiffs’ attorney, called the injunction a “major victory.”
“Hundreds of thousands of people affected by this got a huge reprieve today,” Friednash said. “(The judge) found that we demonstrated the gift bans were too broad and vague. This sends a message to those who recklessly attempt to revise our constitution.”
The state has 45 days to appeal the injunction to the state Supreme Court, but it will likely happen much more quickly, said Evan Dreyer, Ritter’s spokesman.
“Amendment 41 was passed by an overwhelming majority of Colorado voters, and it is our responsibility to seek additional judicial review,” Dreyer said.
The injunction is “bad news for the voters of Colorado,” said Jenny Flanagan, executive director of Colorado Common Cause, one of the groups that drafted the measure.
“Coloradans supported the ethics law because they wanted to level the playing field for all Coloradans,” she said. “Ultimately, the Supreme Court will affirm Amendment 41.”
Jared Polis, a chief financial backer of the effort to get the amendment passed, could not be reached for comment Thursday afternoon.
The temporary injunction will remain in place until a trial is scheduled and completed or the Supreme Court reviews the case.
Those who contested the amendment do not understand it properly, Flanagan said.
“Lobbyist restrictions are commonplace,” she said. “There have been wild interpretations of what the gift ban does. The legislature passed a law that made clear that Amendment 41 is about violations of the public trust.”
The amendment, Habas wrote, “must survive or fail this judicial review based upon its originally drafted language, however unintended are the consequences of the imprecision of that language.”
Habas also noted that “over 62 percent” of voters supported the measure.
“On its own, however, this does not provide a compelling or sufficient governmental purpose that justifies the abridgement of First Amendment rights,” she wrote. “There is little doubt that the reach of Amendment 41 went well beyond what was anticipated or intended, based upon what even the Government concedes to be the ambiguous language of the Amendment.”
The First Amendment Council, which helped fund the legal challenge, said the amendment was too broad, created a “chilling effect on speech” and violated the First and 14th Amendments.
“We’ve believed all along that this amendment is unconstitutional, and we’re anxious to have our day in court and prove that contention,” Bill Becker, president of the First Amendment Council, said in a prepared statement.
Senate President Joan Fitz- Gerald, D-Jefferson County, said lawmakers could consider some sort of revised ethics amendment in next year’s legislative session but that they “should be cognizant of the pitfalls” faced by Amendment 41.
House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, said the legislature should put ethics rules into state statute rather than the constitution.
“We can and we should pass a clearly worded ethics law that holds public officials and public employees to the same high standards voters demanded,” he said.
Until then, Romanoff said, he would ask his colleagues to comply with Amendment 41 “to the best of their ability.”
