Review of charter school denials
Brannberg v. Cimino
In brief
- Where it stands
- Petition Pending
Awaiting an order on the petition
- What it’s about
- Judy A.
- What's at stake
- Brannberg's challenges to those Colorado procedures remain unresolved; the Supreme Court has not decided whether they violate the Constitution.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Brannberg has asked the Supreme Court to review Colorado’s bar on court challenges to charter-school application denials, a state civil-rights agency’s refusal to consider religious-employment discrimination and retaliation claims, and limits on review of attorney-discipline decisions. She argues these rules violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments and that the attorney-regulation system leaves alleged misconduct beyond discipline.
Brannberg's petition links three Colorado processes—charter-school application denials, civil-rights agency jurisdiction, and attorney-discipline appeals—to claimed First and Fourteenth Amendment violations.
Question presented
1. Whether the “finality” clause in C.R.S. § 22-30.5-108(3)(d), which bars judicial review of charter school application denials, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments when those denials resulted from constitutional violations. 2. Whether a state civil rights agency (CCRD) violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments by refusing to assert jurisdiction over third-party religious employment discrimination and retaliation claims by the Authorizer in charter school applications, in direct conflict with binding EEOC policy and federal precedent. 3. Whether Colorado’s unreviewable attorney regulation—under which the Colorado Supreme Court Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel (“OARC”) decisions are final and non-appealable under Chessin v. OARC, 2020 CO 9—shields attorney misconduct, RICO, fraud, forgery, bribery, sabotage of counsel, religious discrimination, and Unauthorized Practice of Law by a disbarred attorney from discipline, thereby violating First and Fourteenth Amendments.
What happens next
The next step is for the Court to decide whether to hear the petition. No argument or decision date is set.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
More questions
- What does Brannberg challenge?
- She asks whether Colorado's bar on court review of charter-school application denials, CCRD's refusal to consider certain religious-discrimination and retaliation claims, and limits on appeals from attorney-regulation decisions violate the Constitution.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.