Posted by
NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 4:50:54 PM
This is a question that I sincerely hope will make the lawyers in the legislature think hard about inserting the so-called "safety clause" in a bill when it cannot clearly be shown to impact "public peace, health, and safety."
The "safety clause" is a mechanism that is used by legislators to protect legislation from any attempt by the citizens to overturn it through an initiative. It is usually attached at the end of a bill by the author and reads"
"Safety Clause: The General Assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the public peace, health, and safety."
Senate Bill 46, Sponsored by State Senator Ken Gordon, an "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by Nationwide Popular Vote" doesn't appear to be a health issue. Likewise, there is no law enforcement component to the law which would seem to rule out any "public peace or safety" issues. In fact, since it may not go into effect for years, if ever, it doesn't qualify as any kind of "emergency" in the common usage of that word.
Did Senator Ken Gordon practice deception and thus violate his legal ethics code by appending the safety clause onto that bill, and would any lawyer-legislator who voted for it also be violating his ethics code? You be the judge. We almost certainly won't hear from John Gleason or his minions at the Office of Attorney Regulation. The Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct state:
Rule 8.4 Misconduct
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;