Advocacy & Legal
In This Section
2020 Colorado Laws Enacted Affecting Municipal Governments is now available. Past editions are available here.
The Statehouse Report is published every Monday during the Legislative Session.
CML produces position papers on bills throughout the legislative session. Click here to view.
- Take a look at CML's priorities for the 2020 Legislative Session.
Colorado Supreme Court Affirms Municipal Authority to Regulate Firearms
July 7, 2020
In late June, the Colorado Supreme Court in Rocky Mountain Gun Owners v. Polis, 18SC817 (Colo. 2020), unanimously upheld a 2013 state statute that prohibits large-capacity ammunition magazines, defined as more than 15 rounds, typically associated with semi-automatic weapons. C.R.S. § 18-12-301 et seq. The Court held that this law does not violate the right to bear arms found under Art. II, Sec. 13 of the Colorado Constitution because the state general assembly used a reasonable exercise of police power in enacting the statute.
The decision is important for municipalities because the Court affirmed and clarified the standards that apply in a lawsuit over a local or state firearms law. The Court clarified that right to bear arms is not an unlimited right and is subject to reasonable regulation. The standard in Colorado that a court uses to see whether the law should be upheld is called “reasonable exercise test” and originates from Robertson v. City & County of Denver, 874 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1994).
Tenth Circuit Holds Curfew on Door-to-Door Commercial Solicitors Violation of First Amendment
June 15, 2020
On May 15, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a 7:00 p.m. curfew for door-to-door commercial solicitors because it did not survive First Amendment scrutiny under the Central Hudson test, affirming the district court’s judgment, which concluded that Castle Rock has failed to demonstrate that the curfew advances its substantial interests in a direct and material way. CML filed an amicus brief in support of Castle Rock in this case.
New in the Courts
University of Colorado Board of Regents to Appeal District Court Decision on CORA Violation
June 8, 2020The University of Colorado Board of Regents voted April 10to appeal the March 6 decision by the Denver District Court that the Board of Regents violated the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) and Open Meetings Law (OML) when it disclosed a sole finalist for its 2019 presidential search after interviewing six candidates from a larger pool of applicants. CORA and OML require all public bodies in the state to announce the “finalists” when filling an “executive position.” The Board of Regents maintains that the six people interviewed were not finalists and therefore their names and application materials are not subject to disclosure under CORA.
The case was decided on a statutory interpretation and the plain and ordinary meaning of the statutes to find that “the legislature plainly expressed its intent that the names and records of more than one ‘finalist’ be disclosed.” While the Court agreed with the Board of Regents’ position that CORA and OML do not require public entities to always use a formal screening process, they held these statutes “do direct public bodies, including the Board of Regents, ‘as to how to’ disclose their business to the public.”
2019 Laws Enacted is Available