Welcome to Court Crawl, Colorado Politics’ roundup of news from the third branch of government.

The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments in eight cases last month, and the justices have agreed to address a potentially unconstitutional provision of a relatively new free speech law.

Supreme Court arguments

•  In an unusual twist on its normal routine, the Supreme Court scheduled arguments in five cases in a row that all pertained to the same broad subject: When do trial judges lose the ability to order defendants to pay financial restitution to crime victims? Three years ago, the court issued a landmark decision called People v. Weeks that recognized judges and prosecutors were treating the legal restitution deadlines as a mere suggestion. Weeks held that if judges don’t follow the process, they lose their authority to award restitution.

•  Although the Colorado Attorney General’s Office has lobbied to curtail that ruling or even to overturn it, the justices made clear during arguments that they weren’t interested in reversing Weeks. The decision’s author, Justice Carlos A. Samour Jr., responded to the government’s complaints by reminding everyone that people weren’t taking the restitution law seriously until Weeks.

•  “This is what it took to finally get them to follow the statute,” he said. “We wanted to give teeth to the deadlines. So, that’s the background here, right? Are you asking us now to go back on that? And go back to the way things used to be?”

•  Elsewhere, members of the court were open to the idea that defendants charged with felony murder shouldn’t be required to admit to the underlying criminal act — like robbery or sexual assault — before they can assert a defense to the more severe offense of murder.

•  The justices seemed to think a flat surcharge on all customers to recover the costs from a winter storm was a fair approach for a utility to take, notwithstanding one customer’s argument to the contrary.

•  The court considered whether students at Colorado State University have any mechanism for refunds after the school closed its physical campus during spring 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

•  The justices have agreed to answer a question the Court of Appeals has called the “worst-case scenario.” When lawmakers enacted an “anti-SLAPP” law in 2019 to quickly dispose of lawsuits implicating First Amendment-protected activity, they specified that appeals of trial judges’ decisions should go to the Court of Appeals. The problem is the state constitution doesn’t give final decisions from county courts a straight path to the Court of Appeals. So, when a county court judge rules on an anti-SLAPP motion, what needs to happen? The Supreme Court will weigh in.

•  The Supreme Court will also interpret a pre-2022 version of Colorado’s campaign finance law, address jury trials in child neglect cases and consider whether lifetime sex offender registration for adults is cruel and unusual punishment.

Heard on appeal

•  The Court of Appeals concluded an exception to the state’s open records law meant the disciplinary actions against public school administrators are not subject to disclosure.

•  Parents can sue medical professionals for negligence if they provide a faulty genetic test result that influences the decision to have children, the Court of Appeals ruled.

•  Colorado Springs isn’t liable for a vehicle accident at an intersection where the traffic lights weren’t completely functional, but not inherently contradictory, either.

In federal news

•  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit agreed not to upend a women’s volleyball tournament 48 hours before it was scheduled to begin, reasoning the plaintiffs challenging a trans athlete’s participation waited too long to seek emergency relief.

•  The 10th Circuit agreed a trial judge mistakenly dismissed a former health care worker’s religious discrimination claim against her employer after it denied her a religious exemption to getting the COVID-19 vaccine.

•  Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court’s precedent, most constitutional rights lawsuits against federal employees are now “dead,” the 10th Circuit clarified.

•  The Jefferson County sheriff didn’t present a compelling reason why she should be allowed to immediately appeal a trial judge’s ruling finding the sheriff can be held liable for alleged constitutional violations by the jail’s medical contractor.

•  SWAT team members acted reasonably when they forcefully entered a suspected drug dealer’s apartment and took him outside half-naked while they searched the home, a judge ruled.

•  A plaintiff doesn’t need to satisfy a higher hurdle to hold the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee liable for his alleged sexual assault at the Colorado Springs training facility.

•  A federal judge found a plaintiff in Colorado’s “supermax” prison could challenge the warden’s bare-bones explanation for withholding an allegedly dangerous book.

•  An incarcerated man may proceed with his excessive force claim against an Aurora officer who allegedly discharged his gun accidentally while arresting the plaintiff.

•  A judge found a former Teller County sheriff’s employee didn’t have viable whistleblower or First Amendment retaliation claims against the elected sheriff.

•  Four senior district judges in Colorado — two appointed during the Bush administration and two appointed during the Obama administration — signed on to a letter endorsing pending legislation to add 66 more trial judgeships to the federal judiciary, starting next year. Five judges on the 10th Circuit also signed the letter.

•  U.S. Magistrate Judge Kathryn A. Starnella spoke about her first year on the bench, including her approach to settlement conferences and her responsibility to handle detention hearings of criminal defendants.

Vacancies and appointments

•  Licensed counselor Elizabeth “Liz” Lembo is the new head of the Colorado Lawyer Assistance Program, which the Supreme Court established to promote wellbeing in the legal community.

Miscellaneous proceedings

•  The Colorado Supreme Court’s ethics panel advised judges they cannot serve as temporary election workers.

•  On Friday, the Fourth Judicial District (El Paso and Teller counties) will host a warrant clearance event to help resolve cases involving low-level felonies, misdemeanors, traffic and municipal offenses. The event will occur from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the courthouse on 270 S. Tejon Street in Colorado Springs. For more information, contact the public defender’s office at 719-475-1235.