Date:         Sun, 5 Feb 1995 01:58:53 -0500
From: BoiseBear@aol.com

Reprinted with permission of Diversity (TM)
Idaho's Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Newspaper
Idaho Attorney General supports anti-gay Amendment 2 in Colorado
by Rich Keefe, Diversity Editor
 BOISE, ID  Even though Idaho's newest Attorney General, Allen Lance, 
took a public position in opposition to  anti-gay Proposition 1 in last year's
election, he is taking an official position in support of Colorado's anti -gay
Amendment 2.
Less than 30 days into his term, the Idaho Attorney General has joined th e
attorney generals of Alabama and Virginia in filing a petition to the U.S 
Supreme Court urging it to review the decision of Colorado's Supreme Court.
Colorado's highest court had declared anti-gay Amendment 2 unconstitution al
and barred its implementation.
Idaho voters defeated an anti-gay ballot initiative by a narrow margin last
November. Lance opposed Idaho's initiative. In fact, when the decision of the
Colorado Supreme Court was announced in October 1994, Lance, and his
Democratic opponent Mike Burkett used the occasion to hold a joint press
conference to voice their opposition to Idaho's  anti-gay initiative. The y
called it unconstitutional and expensive to defend in court.
Now, in a letter to the Solicitor General of the State of Colorado dated
January 13, Lance says, "While it is important that the courts protect th e
constitutional rights of individuals and groups, it is also important that
these protected rights actually be guaranteed by the constitution and not
created at will by the judiciary."
The Attorney General's letter explains that although he took a public
position against an Idaho initiative that was similar to Amendment 2, he
believes the U.S. Supreme Court needs to review the Colorado Supreme Court's
invalidation of a constitutional amendment directly passed by a majority
of voters in that state.
"I believe clarification of this issue will benefit all states, and in
particular, the citizens of the state of Idaho," the letter continues. =

The petition to the U.S. Supreme Court supported by Lance argues that
Colorado's Amendment 2 does not impair any fundamental rights granted under
current equal protection laws. In addition, it claims the Colorado Supreme
Court has by its decision, created a new fundamental right of political
participation which may be inconsistent with the right of the people to enact
constitutional provisions.
The petition says, "This new equal protection doctrine has cast a long shadow
of uncertainty not only over the traditional right of democratic
self-government, but also over the concept of constitutionalism  of
representative government tempered by individual liberty."

Diversity (TM)
PO Box 323, Boise, ID 83701
Email: DiversityN@aol.com