The Colorado Supreme Court has released significantly fewer new opinions in recent months compared to the previous two years, even as the judicial branch insisted that a member’s open-ended absence is not causing delays.

Justice Melissa Hart has been on an unusual leave of absence since Oct. 28, although she also was gone for the entirety of oral arguments that occurred the week prior. Multiple appellate lawyers have told Colorado Politics they could not recall a time when a member of the court took leave during the September-June term.

On Nov. 17, the judicial branch responded to questions by saying the “judicial system is designed to operate effectively, even when individual justices may be unable to participate in court matters. Supreme Court proceedings and decisions will continue as scheduled, without delays for litigants.”

However, the court’s output suggests Hart’s absence could be having an effect after all.

Colorado Politics examined the court’s release of new opinions in 2023, 2024 and 2025 over two periods: From the summer recess that begins in July through mid-October, and from the last week in October through the second week in December.

Each year, the Supreme Court issued roughly the same number of opinions during the first period, with 12 each in 2023 and 2024, and 11 this year.

However, during the second period, corresponding with Hart’s official leave of absence, the Supreme Court issued six opinions in each of the prior two years. In 2025, it released two opinions — a two-thirds decrease. Hart did not participate in either decision.

Asked to comment on the trend, Chief Communications Officer Suzanne Karrer said the Supreme Court “stands by its prior statement” that Hart’s absence is not resulting in delays for litigants.

Karrer also said she has no further information about when Hart would return.

Hart continues to receive her salary pursuant to the state constitution and laws, which amounts to approximately $210,000 annually.

Hart provided a general explanation to Colorado Politics last month for her absence, without going into detail.

“I have very much appreciated the expressions of concern and support I have received from colleagues in the legal community as I have taken a necessary personal leave for family and personal health reasons,” she said at the time. “I will let the Chief Justice and the State Court Administrator know when the issues are resolved so that I can return to work.”

Members of the court occasionally recuse themselves from decisions, although the Supreme Court does not disclose their reasons for doing so. They may also miss oral arguments due to illness or other reasons, but still participate in the opinion.

Last year, the court decided 70 cases with written opinions, with a total of six cases featuring a non-participating justice. The prior year featured slightly more opinions, also with six instances of recusal. That term also featured an unusual all-court recusal involving a disciplinary matter.

So far, there have been four instances of non-participation this year, with two involving Hart’s absence. She will also not participate in a third decision on a recently-heard case, which appears unrelated to the absence.

As of Monday, Hart has also not participated for six weeks in the Supreme Court’s consideration of which appeals to accept or reject — although the court, the same as in past years, did not release announcements the Monday after Thanksgiving.

The Supreme Court has also adopted five rule changes during Hart’s absence, most recently on Dec. 4. The amendments governed topics ranging from remote testimony in civil proceedings to the scope of practice for licensed legal paraprofessionals.

Next week, the Supreme Court will hold its monthly session for oral arguments. If Hart does not attend for the third month in a row, she will have been absent for approximately 30% of the arguments during the 2025-2026 term.