August 12, 2013 07:22 PM UTC

BREAKING: Recalls Upended By Court Ruling (Again)

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

UPDATE #2: FOX 31's Eli Stokols:

The Sept. 10 recall elections of two Democratic Colorado lawmakers was supposed to be the first test-run of a new election overhaul, passed this year by Democrats, that would have sent mail ballots to every voter.

Now, those elections won’t involve any mail ballots at all.

After a long day in court, District Judge Robert McGahey ruled in favor of Colorado Libertarians, who’d sued after being denied a spot on the recall ballot because they failed to meet a deadline, put in place by the new election law, to submit petitions within 10 days of the election date being set…

“I know what this decision means,” McGahey told the court as he issued the ruling around 7 p.m. Monday night, alluding to concerns from county clerks of escalating election costs and from Democrats who worried that the loss of mail ballots, which can’t be printed and mailed to voters in time if candidate signatures are validated so late, will lower voter turnout.

—–

UPDATE: The Colorado Springs Gazette's Megan Schrader:

[Judge Robert] McGahey said Secretary of State Scott Gessler erred when ignoring the constitution in favor of a new state statute that set deadlines for ballot access in the recall elections.

The new deadline was important for another part of the new election law that required ballots to be sent in the mail to every registered voter, regardless of whether they requested one.

—– 

We're still working on the details, but a ruling late today on a conflict between the state's new election statute and the Colorado constitution in Denver District Court appears to throw the upcoming recall special elections into chaos so as to give third party candidates a shot at the ballot. FOX 31's Eli Stokols Tweeted a short while ago:

Apparently, minor party candidates will have the chance to get on the recall successor candidate ballot by August 26th now, which means the expected mailing of ballots next week will not go forward. This decision is also subject to appeal, which seems quite likely under the circumstances. Stand by for updates…