UPDATE: The Supreme Court has reissued their decision to explain that it will not hear the case because the attorney general provided adequate “alternate remedies” in her response to Hickenlooper’s filing, which was a similar case already decided by the court. In that response, Coffman cited a 2003 Supreme Court ruling in which the judges sided with former Attorney General Ken Salazar when he opposed former Gov. Bill Owens over a redistricting plan.
The Colorado Supreme Court issued a one-page decision denying Gov. Hickenlooper’s plea for them to justify his temper tantrum over Attorney General Cynthia Coffman’s insistence that she do her freaking job.
Upon consideration of the Petition for Rule to Show Cause Under C.A.R. 21 filed in the above cause, and now being sufficiently advised in the premises, IT IS ORDERED that said Petition for Rule to Show Cause Under C.A.R. 21 shall be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
That was the full extent of the court’s decision: No, we will not be an enabler to Hickenlooper’s delusions of power.
Hickenlooper challenged the attorney general’s role to act independently of the governor’s office and insisted that as an elected official, she had no right to do the job to which she was elected, especially when she dared challenge the Obama monarchy.
Hick objected when Coffman challenged the fed’s fracking regulations, which by the way, the court agreed the Coffman. But it was Coffman’s challenge to Obama’s “Clean Power Plan” that finally sent him over the edge and crying to the Supreme Court.
Although we’re celebrating now, we don’t expect Hick to just accept the court’s rejection and go his merry way.
We’re willing to bet he’s already looking for another avenue to try and anoint himself “attorney general supreme.”