Colorado Supreme Court rejects lawsuit seeking to stop Amendment 87

Nick Coltrain, The Denver Post on Oct 30, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

DENVER — The Colorado Supreme Court on Friday shot down an attempt to nullify the vote on Amendment 87, allowing the proposal to raise taxes on the state’s wealthiest residents to proceed.

The lawsuit, filed by conservative activist Michael Hancock, sought to stop the vote on the amendment on procedural grounds by alleging that its backers used paid signature gatherers who weren’t following state registration rules. The lawsuit was filed in mid-September, about two weeks after the ballot was certified and three weeks before voters started receiving their ballots in the mail.

A Denver District Court judge ruled Oct. 21 that Hancock “did not meet his burden” to establish that any failure by the petition gatherers equaled a violation of laws meant to prevent misconduct in the petition process.

One of the alleged problems was that a handful of signature gatherers did not complete training conducted by the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office. They did, however, receive training about laws governing petitioning from the proponents.

On Friday, the state Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s decision in a short, unsigned order. A full opinion will be issued “in due course,” it stated.

“Twice now, Colorado courts have said that more than 130,000 voters who signed this petition deserve to have their signatures count, and that Coloradans deserve to decide this question for themselves,” said Chris deGruy Kennedy, co-chair of Amendment 87’s proponent group Protect Colorado’s Future and president of the Bell Policy Center, in a statement.

He acknowledged “administrative oversights” while registering some paid circulators, but that the campaign fully disclosed that information after its petitions were submitted. The campaign was “substantially complying with the letter and spirit of the law,” deGruy Kennedy said.

“The attempt by these dark-money-funded lawyers to say otherwise was a perversion of the law with one goal: deprive Colorado voters of the opportunity to vote on Amendment 87,” deGruy Kennedy said.

Lawyers for Hancock did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Amendment 87, which would dramatically remake Colorado tax policy, has been the subject of a fierce — and occasionally falsehood-fed — fight between supporters and opponents.

If passed, the amendment to the Colorado Constitution would create a graduated income tax system where money earned after a person’s first $500,000 in income is taxed at a dramatically higher rate than the current 4.4% tax that applies to all income.

The proposal would cut taxes for the majority of Coloradans.

-----------