        |
Press Releases » Status of Amendment 41 » Statement regarding Colorado Supreme Court Decision
» Colorado Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Amendment 41 » Denver District Court Judge stops Amendment 41 » Prominent Coloradans join legal challenge to Amendment 41 » Citizens’ Attorneys will challenge state filing on Amendment 41 » Attorneys file injunction to stop Amendment 41 » Initial Press Release
Articles » Common Cause has lost credibility over Amendment 41 debacle » Stopping Amendment 41 » 41 on ropes, Part 2 » State lawmakers still need to address ethics » Judge blocks ethics mandate » 41: Going, going ... » Judge lifts lobbyist gift ban » Judge blocks Amendment 41 » Judge Blocks Enforcement Of State Ethics Rules » Ethics-law backers keep their papers from public view » Plea for Amend. 41 injunction now in judge's hands » Lobbyist: Amend. 41 chills work » Amendment 41 hindered fundraiser, police official says » Court hears Amendment 41 suit on free speech question today » Ethics law blocking benefits for ranchers » Blake: Nature of 41 in the balance » Amendment 41 isn’t law yet AG argues » Governor, AG ask court to toss suit
» Ethics Law takes bite out of dinner. » The Grand Sham » Still Tampering with 41 » Court Motion seeks to stop enforcement of Amendment 41. » Ethical dilemma » Ex-Firestone official joins ethics law suit » Colorado's Amendment 41 hits sour note » Told ya so - Careless voting comes with consequences » Repeal of Amendment 41 is the only solution to this bad law » More groups seeking legal resolution on state gift ban » 41 under siege » Amend. 41 anger spreads » New suit challenges ethics amendment » Second lawsuit planned against 41 » Anti-41 chorus gains voices » 2nd Suit Filed Over Ethics Law, Scholarship Impact » Two more lawsuits surface over Amendment 41 » Amendment leaves City of Brush with an empty seat » First Amendment Council formed to challenge Amendment 41 _________________________________________________________ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Constitutional challenge to Amendment 41 filed DENVER – Attorneys for individuals and organizations denied their rights by Amendment 41 challenged the amendment’s constitutionality in Denver District Court today. Additionally, the group will ask the court to grant an injunction against the amendment’s implementation until constitutional questions can be answered. Because the suit addresses core speech and association issues, it will address the broad spectrum of individuals and groups hurt by Amendment 41, not only students seeking scholarships. “In a society where communication is the essence of self-government and participation in the political process is a fundamental right, Amendment 41’s restrictions on speech and association must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest in order for the Amendment to be constitutional,” said Jean Dubofsky, a former Colorado Supreme Court Justice who will be representing the plaintiffs. “This amendment is not and we believe that courts will agree.” Plaintiffs in the suit include Developmental Pathways, a non-profit organization that provides services to developmentally disabled individuals and their families in Arapahoe and Douglas counties and the city of Aurora; Edward Stammel, the father of a developmentally disabled son; Adams County Economic Development, Inc.; Norma Anderson, a former state Senator and grandmother of the children of a local elected official; Doug Abraham, a police officer with the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center, whose fellow officers were not allowed to contribute more than $50 to assist a fellow officer with family funeral expenses; Sue Rusch, a Littleton resident who voted for the amendment because of its confusing language and Ginny Buscek, a former Firestone planning commissioner. All of the plaintiffs have specific concerns prompted by the passage and subsequent interpretations of the implications of Amendment 41. Ginny Buscek was forced to resign her volunteer position as a Firestone planning commissioner because she feared that being a government official would bar her two college-aged daughters from receiving their academic scholarships. “I followed the law and resigned my position with the Firestone planning commission because I did not want it to negatively affect my children and their college education,” Buczek said. “I simply couldn’t put my children in that position just so I could volunteer for my town. It was a truly sad choice I was forced to make.” Colorado voters approved Amendment 41 in November 2006. Since the, various government officials, including the Colorado Attorney General, have attempted to interpret the amendment’s reach. The legal challenge mounted by the plaintiffs hinges on two arguments:
“In many cases Amendment 41 has already reached countless aspects of everyday life for average Coloradans in a negative and harmful way. It has already begun to change the ability of citizens to speak to government and ultimately, that hurts democracy, said Doug Friednash, an attorney for Fairfield and Woods, a law firm which is representing the citizens who have joined the suit. “But most importantly, it has already begun to curb the rights we hold most dear as Americans, the right to speak and the right to freely associate with whomever we choose.” The First Amendment Council, which is funding the lawsuit, is a registered non-profit corporation in the state of Colorado. The Council is a collection of Colorado-based individuals, non-profits and businesses assembled on behalf of all Coloradans who have had their constitutional rights violated by the broad and unfocused language of Amendment 41. Individuals who would like to learn more about the challenge or to read a copy of the filing, http://www.firstamendmentcouncil.org/ ###
|
