One of the defining hallmarks of the COVID era, at least in terms of governance, is the expansive use of executive power. However reluctantly initiated, once the virginity of executive restraint is lost, it becomes ever easier and more tempting to employ it further. The current circumstances have provided ample opportunities for exercising that temptation.

One of Gov. Polis’ more egregious excesses is receiving justifiable pushback from a wide swath of the state’s business community, legal scholars and others concerned over the stability of the state’s legal and political foundation. About a month ago, the governor signed an executive order allowing signatures for ballot initiatives to be collected electronically. This unilaterally changes the state constitution, which has long prescribed that signatures petitioning for ballot measures must be collected in person, in front of a qualified witness.

This presents several difficulties, not the least of which is the decidedly flagrant violation of properly established constitutional procedure. Coloradans, over the course of the state’s history, established the procedure by which changes to the states foundational legal document are to be made. The argument can be made as to whether or not those procedures are too lenient or not, but they are necessarily lapidary. Those rules state that the constitution can only be amended by a vote of the people, after the proposed change is referred to them by the state legislature, or upon collecting a prescribed number of petition signatures (in person) from each county. The rules do not allow for evasion, whatever the excuse.

This particular executive order is not, of course, the only one of the governor’s to be questioned. Valid arguments can and have been made concerning the scope and length of the governor’s emergency powers, and have initiated (one hopes) a conversation that will (one hopes) result in a serious examination of the latitude granted the executive by the legislature in time of emergency. The difference in this instance, and the question to be asked, is whether those emergency powers extend to wholesale circumvention of the constitution’s instructions for how we govern ourselves.

Nor, lest we forget, is this the first instance in Colorado during COVID Standard Time that the state constitution has been treated as a mere annoyance to be set aside for expediency’s sake. You will recall the state Supreme Court taking it upon itself earlier in the year to decide that the constitutional directives governing the length of the legislative session meant something — else — during unusual times. This is, however, the first instance of such evasions being employed by executive order, and the first with such potentially long-lasting and broad impacts.

This is not simply a matter of bypassing arcane custom or convention. The constitutionally-based system we have inherited is specifically set up to ensure we as a people are governed by laws, enacted through a proper and uniform method, rather than by the ephemeral conjuries of a particular head of state, or an oligarchy. One can argue that exceptional circumstance requires flexibility, and there is validity in that. But should that flexibility be extended so far as to inject elasticity into that which is purposely rigid? The strength of a constitution lies in the very fact that it applies especially in extraordinary circumstances, lest those circumstances offer a pathway for abuse.

Something as esoteric as the manner in which ballot initiative petition signatures are collected may seem a small thing, but it is the details that make up the process, and that process can result in enormous consequences. Coloradans have been asked to vote on some pretty monumental issues over the years — legalization of marijuana, egregious tax increases, changes to the tax code itself, and a plethora of other items. This year, too, important measures will be on the ballot, including one which will impact how our state casts its votes for president. The manner in which such important questions get onto the ballot is not one which should be left to the exigencies of the moment, but clearly spelled out by properly established rules which are firmly adhered to.

A growing number of leaders in Colorado’s business community recognize that the elections process and the state’s constitution, which delineates the rules we all must live by, are too important to leave to any one person responding reflexively to the fleeting whims of the moment. Their lawsuit against this executive order, which is being taken up by the Colorado Supreme Court, must prevail, and establish the precedent that the rule of law never be allowed to be sacrificed on the altar of expediency.

Kelly Sloan is a political and public affairs consultant and a recovering journalist based in Denver.