Colorado voters soundly rejected a populist attempt to subject judges to term limits. It would have made all seven Supreme Court justices and all 19 Appeals Court judges face a retention vote every four years (instead of every 10 and eight, respectively). Opponents argued the measure would have allowed the next governor to stack the courts, as well as delaying decisions and creating greater backlogs in the courts.
Supporters said term limits would hold judges more accountable and prevent activist judges from serving for life. Former Senate President John Andrews, chairman of Limit the Judges, cited court rulings he said cried out for judicial reform, including a state Supreme Court decision blocking a ballot measure asking voters to deny many services to illegal immigrants. Andrews also argued that if the governor and the Legislature have term limits, the judicial branch should as well.
The opposition enjoyed widespread support from a long list of politicians, lawyers and business groups. The Rocky Mountain News reported that the Colorado Bar Association spent more than $500,000 in an attempt to defeat the measure.
Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said, “Colorado voters may have been wary of the unknown consequences of judicial term limits and voted this measure down, but the very fact that this measure made it on the ballot indicates that Coloradans, like people in many other states, are increasingly frustrated with courts usurping the role of legislators and voters, and are looking for ways to rein in their courts. This appears to be the beginning, not the end, of those efforts."
