2012 CO 17
Colo.2012Background
- Students sue UC Board of Regents alleging Policy 14-I violates the Colorado Concealed Carry Act (CCA) and Colorado Constitution right to bear arms.
- Policy 14-I generally forbids handgun possession on campus; exceptions are for peace officers or others with written permission, with expulsions as a minimum sanction for students who violate it.
- CCA was enacted to create statewide, uniform standards for concealed carry and to occupy the field of regulation; it does not separately exclude university campuses in its listed limitations.
- District court dismissed; court of appeals reversed, holding the CCA applied to campuses and supported the constitutional claim to some extent.
- Colorado Supreme Court affirmes on statutory grounds, holding the CCA divests the Board of Regents of authority to regulate concealed handgun possession on campus, and remands for further proceedings; constitutional issue not addressed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the CCA divest the Board of Regents of authority on campus? | Students: CCA occupies field statewide; campuses included. | Board: CCA covers only local governments and does not divest Board’s authority. | CCA divests Board of Regents; statutory claim stated. |
| Should the constitutional right to bear arms be addressed here? | Right to bear arms is infringed on campus under state constitution. | Court did not reach constitutional issue; decision based on statutory grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ramos v. Regents of the Univ. of Colo., 759 P.2d 726 (Colo. 1988) (broad statewide statute divests university authority when comprehensive and lacks limiting clause)
- Associated Students v. Regents of the Univ. of Colorado, 543 P.2d 60 (Colo. 1975) (expressio unius exclusio alterius; authority divestiture requires explicit language)
- Uberoi v. Univ. of Colorado, 686 P.2d 785 (Colo. 1984) (Open Records Act; divestiture requires express statutory language)
- Beeghly v. Mack, 20 P.3d 610 (Colo. 2001) (interpretive canon on exclusions and inclusions in statutory schemes)
- City of Littleton v. State, 855 P.2d 448 (Colo. 1993) (broad statutory schemes and divestiture considerations)