Notable Links



Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

Michael Bender new Chief Justice of Colorado Supreme Court

by: Voyageur

Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 15:25:36 PM MST


From the Court.

               DENVER - Justice Michael L. Bender was named as Chief Justice of the Colorado Supreme Court on Wednesday.  Justice Bender's fellow justices named him to head the court, effective Dec. 1, 2010.
               Justice Bender succeeds Chief Justice Mullarkey, who announced her retirement in May, and whose last day on the bench will be Nov. 30, 2010.  Chief Justice Mullarkey joined the Court on June 29, 1987, and was named Chief Justice on Aug. 3, 1998
               

Voyageur :: Michael Bender new Chief Justice of Colorado Supreme Court
 "I am pleased and honored to be selected by my colleagues to serve in this capacity," said Justice Bender.  "I look forward to continuing the important initiatives Chief Justice Mullarkey undertook in her remarkable career and working with the other branches of state government to ensure our courts are prepared to face the challenges of the future."
               Justice Bender joined the court in January 1997.  He was in private practice from 1979 to 1997.  He also served in public defender offices in Denver, Jefferson County and for the State of Colorado and also worked for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  He received his undergraduate degree from Dartmouth College in 1964 and his JD from the University of Colorado School of Law in 1967.  Justice Bender is married to Helen H. Hand, Ph.D., and they have five children and five grandchildren.

               "Justice Bender has been a great colleague and valued member of the Court," Chief Justice Mullarkey said.  "I am confident Justice Bender will serve Colorado well in his new role."

               Justice Bender is the 44th member of the Court to be named Chief Justice since Colorado's statehood in 1876.
0
In his new role, Bender will be responsible for naming the four final members of the 11 member bipartisan commission that will reapportion the Colorado Legislature.  By law, no more than six members may be of the same political party.

Tags: (All Tags)


Mazel tov!


I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

Bender, of course, was one of three Justices
targeted by the far-right Clear the Bench Campaign.  He was retained by Colorado voters with about 61.2 percent of the vote as were his colleagues.  That was a few points under the roughly 2-1 margins most Court of Appeals Judges earned but otherwise Clear the Bench seems to have utterly failed in its objective of a right-wing purge to the Court.
  Sic Semper Blowhardis

so, you are predicting 10 more years of tyranny?


I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Nope, I'm saying that Arnold and his blowhard friends
can expect 10 more years of total irrelevance before we next thrash their sorry asses;-)

[ Parent ]
Shut up! Arnold has friends?
In my observation, he flew solo.  Over and over and over again

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Don't forget the prince of darkness, John Andrews


[ Parent ]
First ruling from Chief Justice Bender
"Plaintiff can bite my shiny metal ass.  Dismissed!"

LOL
That was my first thought when I saw the headline: "Bender Named Chief Justice"

Pols had to ruin the fun and actually put his first name in the headline. :P

"Do you have a program that throws meaningless phrases together to make ridiculous statements...? or do you really make this shit up yourself?" -dukeco1 in reply to Libertad


[ Parent ]
11 member bipartisan commission that will "redistrict"

I think after the commission does their thing, the Chief also gets to review the plan and decide "yes or no" as regards constitutionality.



Ear to the ground, I think you're mistaken
I don't believe the Chief Justice reviews the work of the reapportionment commission unless and until the commission's work is challenged in state court.  So sayeth the Psalms.

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Does that mean you have mud in your ears, Jammy?


[ Parent ]
Mud in the ears + a clear eye
...for important details

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Old country song
I've got tears in my ears from lying in my bed crying over you.

that, plus having your ear to the ground can produce mud in the ears...

[ Parent ]
Yes and no, Madco
The court as a whole has the final say on legislative reapportionment, not the Chief Justice alone.  Chief Justice, however, makes the 4 appointments on his/her authority.
 Last time, two of the democrats, Nancy Rice and Hodges, sided with Republicans Coats and Kourlis and rejected the Senate plan, which would have precluded Mark Hillman from winning the 18th and decisive seat for the Republicans.  The result of the rehearing was that Hillman was able to win the seat.
  Without that, Andrews would not have had the votes to attempt his infamous Midnight Gerrymander.  When the court struck down that Gerrymander Hillman joined in bashing the court.  I called him on his hypocrisy.  His answer: "One correct ruling doesn't excuse what they've done."
  I actually regard this as the chief flaw in the reapportionment plan, since it gives a key role to the chief justice in appointing members and then gives the same chief justice at least a role in reviewing his or her appointees work.
   I'd rather have the elected officials in the lege name 4 and 4   and let the commission agree on the ninth appointee.  If they don't agree, then, and only then, I'd have the court name the tie-breaker.  
Alternatively, have the tie-breaker, in event of deadlock, named by a rep of the American Arbitration Assn.  (This is the way we choose labor arbitrators, each side proposes a list and you pick the first person on both lists.)  

[ Parent ]
Hodges, aka Hobbs!
I checked the court's website!  (yes, I know how to use the internet sometimes, when it interests me).

Meanwhile the court has the final say in the commission's work only if the commission's work is challenged in state court.  If people don't like the court's opinion, they should stop askin'!

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.


[ Parent ]
Hobbs it is, I was still thinking of the JBC lady,
as to the court deciding lawsuits: D'uh!
 That doesn't change the fact that there is a potential conflict of interest between having the chief justice make appointments at the beginning of the process, then rule on any challenges to the work of his/her appointees at the end of it.
  The authors assumed the chief justice would be above politics.  But the first time it came up, the chief justice -- whose name actually was hodges -- was an old Republican wheelhorse from the days when judges ran on partisan labels.  He packed the commission with partisan republicans like Bob Lee and they reamed the Ds royally.  Mullarkey kind of evened the score in 2002.
  The one time I really did see the court above the battle was the year Luis Rovira was CJ and he really did go for a fairly balanced set of appointments.   Very few complaints that year.   But short of a constitutional amendment requiring Luis Rovira to be chief justice forever, I think it's time we got the court out of the commissioner appointing business.
 PS==yes, this is the same justice Hobbs that McInnis plagiarized.  A real expert on water and natural resource law.

[ Parent ]
all I'm saying is PLEASE
...please

Mullarkey named 4 non-Republicans in a scenario where she was REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION to name 3 non-Republicans (to keep the balance mandated by the constitution after Owens, et al. had stacked the commission the other way).  So, Mullarkey could've picked 1 more Republican than she did.  This hardly constiutes evidence of anything at all (much less evening the score).

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.


[ Parent ]
All you're saying is that
you really don't know anything about this subject but want to sound off anyway.
  The thought that Mullarkey would pick a Republican is silly.  She did go out of her way to pick strongly partisan democrats.  And two of her own court, Rice and Hobbs, voted to overturn their work.
  Enough said.

[ Parent ]
Serenity now
I've given you facts and you've responded with bitterness, without responding to the facts presented at all.  Noted, dearest.  (NB: more than 2 of "her own court" voted to overturn the commission's work.  4 did.  And she had no more control of their votes in this case than in any other case)

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
You didn't know the facts and didn't want to.
As originally stated, there were five democrats on the court, two of whom, hobbs and rice, joined the two rs, coats and khourlis, to overturn the work of Markey's appointees.
I didn't respond with bitterness, you simply blew an opinion out of your ass so you could appear to be knowledgeable.
 Hardly the first time, sweetie;-)
   

[ Parent ]
way to miss the facts that I referenced
(i.e, that 3 of her 4 picks were mandated by the constitution).  cover your eyes!!!!!  it burns

Oh, as "originally stated" by you, Hodges was still on the court.  D'oh!

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.


[ Parent ]
You didn't reference any facts, you quoted from my post.
This is my last response to your trollishness tonight.  You get the last word.  Try hard to make it a bit less stupid that your previous posts.

[ Parent ]
VICTORY
...as cemented by your admission that quoting from your post is very different from referencing facts.  Sweetnesssssssssssssssss

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Penalty Box?
Isn't there a rule against these endless back-and-forths between two Polsters?

Frankly, if Voyageur and Jambalaya were exiled to the Penalty Box, I bet lots of others (myself included) would violate some rules pronto to get in there with them.

A leader on the battlefield can be a leader in Congress. -- redstateblues


[ Parent ]
come on in, the water's fine
And, I still like Voyeurism (er, -ageur).  He simply way wrong tonight.  He can't be right all the time, it's unseemly!  (I should know)

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Gawd, the thought of being locked up in a small room
with only Jammypants for company is enough to drive me to Square State!

[ Parent ]
Sponge SquareState pants!


I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Supreme Court Review
The Supreme Court reviews the state legislative reapportionment plan per the Constitution.  

... the commission shall finalize its plan and submit the same to the Colorado supreme court for review and determination as to compliance with sections 46 and 47 of this article.  Such review and determination shall take precedence over other matters before the court. The supreme court shall adopt rules for such proceedings and for the production and presentation of supportive evidence for such plan. Any legal arguments or evidence concerning such plan shall be submitted to the supreme court pursuant to the schedule established by the court; ...

Colo. Const. art. V, sec. 48(1)(e).  The reapportionment process does not involve the state courts.


[ Parent ]
Thanks for the info,aat
Much easier to hear from you than to look up shit myself!

I'm not as sweet as I used to be.

[ Parent ]
Now, THAT is funny!


Here's a link to a fine Jerry Kopel article
recounting the role chief justices play in legislative reapportionment games.
http://www.jerrykopel.com/b/Re...
 It's only flaw is quoting some doofus editorial writer...

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?







Advertise Here!
ads@coloradopols.com


Active Users
Currently 6 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search



Colorado Pols Network


Jeffco Pols
  More >

Denver Pols
  More >











RSS 2.0



Pols Gets Mobile: ColoradoPols.com/mobile/

Colorado Pols is on Twitter: twitter.com/coloradopols

Email Pols


How to Write a Diary That Will Make the Front Page



Terms of Use/Privacy Policy



Pols Posting Policies



The Pols Penalty Box



Yard Signs!



The Pols "Mailbag"

Mailbag #1

Relevant Links

The Bell Policy Center

The Big Media Blog

Blog It Right

Blog For Growth

Blogometer

Business Word

Colorado Capitol Journal

Colorado Center on Law and Policy

Colorado Democratic Party

Colorado Ethics Watch

Colorado Independent

Colorado Labor Blog

Colorado Veterans for America

Colorado Legislature

Colorado Lib

Colorado Libertarian Blog

Colorado Media Matters

Colorado Progressive Coalition

Colorado Republican Party

Colorado Secretary of State

Colorado Senate Dems

Colorado Senate GOP

Colorado Young Democrats

Commentary Today

Coyote Gulch

CU Democrats

Curious Stranger

Daily Kos

Dan Willis-Rumors

Dem Notes

Democracy for Colorado

Denver Politics

East Boulder County Politics

Ed Stein Ink

Election Neutrality Now

eleXn

George in Denver

Great Education Colorado

Head First Colorado

The Hotline Political Network

Junction Daily Blog

Left in the West

Liberal and Loving It

Maintain Educational Standards in Colorado

Mount Virtus

MyDD

National Journal

On Call

Peak Dems

Political State Report

Progress Now

Prometheus

Project Vote Smart

Radio Free Denver

Senate Guru

Slapstick Politics

Steam Powered Opinions

Square State

Stygius

TalkLeft

The Thicket

The Hypothetical Wren

ThomasMC.com

Toilet Paper Online

TRACER Campaign Finance

View From a Height

Walter in Denver

Wash Park Prophet

Western Democrat


Colorado Pols is wholly owned by Colorado Pols, LLC
webmaster-at-coloradopols.com

Powered by: SoapBlox