U.S. District Court: General Assembly Members Have Standing to Challenge Colorado's TABOR Amendment

U.S. District Court: General Assembly Members Have Standing to Challenge Colorado's TABOR Amendment

In an action challenging the constitutionality of Colorado's Taxpayer Bill of Rights, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado held that current members of the General Assembly had standing to bring the action; the court dismissed the plaintiffs' equal protection claim but allowed the remaining constitutional claims.

In an action challenging the constitutionality and legality of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado held that current members of the General Assembly had standing to bring the action; the court dismissed the plaintiffs' equal protection claim but allowed the remaining constitutional claims. TABOR is an amendment to Colorado's constitution that prohibits the state's General Assembly from increasing tax rates or imposing new taxes without voter approval. Thirty-three plaintiffs, including current members of the General Assembly (legislator-plaintiffs), former members of the General Assembly, and current and former county commissioners, mayors, council members, and other individuals, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado challenging the constitutionality and legality of TABOR. They alleged that by taking away the General Assembly's power to tax, TABOR violates Colorado's constitutional and statutory obligations to maintain a republican form of government. The plaintiffs also raised other claims, including equal protection and impermissible amendment claims. The state filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the action, that their claims present non-justicable political questions, and that their equal protection and impermissible amendment claims are also subject to dismissal. The court held that the legislator-plaintiffs have standing to challenge the constitutionality of TABOR because it directly affects their ability to fulfill their official responsibilities. The court also explained that because it determined the legislator-plaintiffs have standing, it need not address whether the remaining individuals also have standing. The court also held that the plaintiffs' claims are not barred by the political question doctrine. Because the legislator-plaintiffs did not allege that they are members of a protected class or that they are being treated differently from other similarly situated people in Colorado, the court dismissed the equal protection claim. The court held that the plaintiffs' remaining claims may stand.

In an action challenging the constitutionality and legality of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado held that current members of the General Assembly had standing to bring the action; the court dismissed the plaintiffs' equal protection claim but allowed the remaining constitutional claims. TABOR is an amendment to Colorado's constitution that prohibits the state's General Assembly from increasing tax rates or imposing new taxes without voter approval. Thirty-three plaintiffs, including current members of the General Assembly (legislator-plaintiffs), former members of the General Assembly, and current and former county commissioners, mayors, council members, and other individuals, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado challenging the constitutionality and legality of TABOR. They alleged that by taking away the General Assembly's power to tax, TABOR violates Colorado's constitutional and statutory obligations to maintain a republican form of government. The plaintiffs also raised other claims, including equal protection and impermissible amendment claims. The state filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the action, that their claims present non-justicable political questions, and that their equal protection and impermissible amendment claims are also subject to dismissal. The court held that the legislator-plaintiffs have standing to challenge the constitutionality of TABOR because it directly affects their ability to fulfill their official responsibilities. The court also explained that because it determined the legislator-plaintiffs have standing, it need not address whether the remaining individuals also have standing. The court also held that the plaintiffs' claims are not barred by the political question doctrine. Because the legislator-plaintiffs did not allege that they are members of a protected class or that they are being treated differently from other similarly situated people in Colorado, the court dismissed the equal protection claim. The court held that the plaintiffs' remaining claims may stand.