Department of Law asks for three attorneys to meet surge in federal legal work; agency warns counsel demand exceeds capacity

The Colorado Department of Law asked the Joint Budget Committee to approve three full‑time attorney positions to absorb a portion of the department’s growing workload tied to recent federal executive actions and rapidly changing federal guidance.

Deputy Attorney General Kurt Morrison told lawmakers that the department has seen a large increase both in litigation (new suits, amicus briefs and interventions) and in the volume of legal advice sought by state agencies and institutions of higher education. Morrison said the department provided a memo in the committee binder summarizing litigation activity since Jan. 20 and that the new duties are not solely courtroom work but a sustained need for legal counsel to help agencies respond to shifting federal directives.

What Department of Law told the committee - Scope of the request: The department requested three FTE—described as a mix of Deputy Solicitors General and Assistant Attorney General positions—to address the new workload. Morrison said roughly 20–25% of the department’s increased legal workload is new litigation; the remainder is legal counsel and compliance advice to state agencies. - Examples and volume: Morrison noted appendix material in the memo that lists seven new lawsuits the state has joined, eight amicus briefs and three interventions, and said the legal landscape is “changing, almost daily, sometimes even hourly” from Washington. He described a roughly 30‑lawyer team currently handling this work and said the current effort is equivalent to a larger number of full‑time resources when annualized. - Risk framing: The department told the committee the request is a modest investment compared with the scale of the potential fiscal impact. Morrison said that federal changes affecting grants and funding could put “hundreds of millions to possibly over a billion” dollars of state federal funding at risk, though he framed that as a very preliminary, high‑level estimate.

Questions from the committee and department responses - Billing vs. general fund: Committee members asked why the Department of Law’s workload request was not handled through the common policy of client billing. Morrison explained that some litigation and legal actions cannot be billed to a single client agency because the state itself is the plaintiff or defendant (for example, lawsuits challenging federal directives affecting the whole state). Those matters therefore cannot be allocated under the usual client‑billing model and create costs that must be funded centrally. - Standing and local litigation: Morrison warned that Colorado will face cases for which only Colorado has standing—local grant decisions, military facilities and other state‑specific impacts—and that relying on other states to lead all litigation would be insufficient.

Clarifying details provided to the committee - Litigation summary (department memo): 7 new lawsuits, 8 amicus briefs, 3 interventions (as summarized in the Department of Law’s appendix cited to the committee) - Department staff: Morrison said the department has a team of approximately 30 lawyers working on the issue; department testimony characterized the added workload as equivalent to more staff when annualized - Work mix: Department estimated roughly 60% of new workload is legal advice and counsel to agencies and IHEs, with the remainder litigation and filings

Discussion vs. decision - Discussion: The hearing focused on the nature of the new federal directives, the volume of advice the department must provide to state agencies, and whether the common‑policy and client‑billing model captures the spike in workload. - Direction: Morrison provided the committee with a detailed memorandum in the binder and offered to update the litigation tables as cases evolve. - Formal decision: The committee did not take a vote during this session.

The Department of Law asked the JBC to consider the three FTE request as a targeted, short‑term increase to preserve the department’s capacity to advise agencies and defend state interests while the federal policy environment continues to shift.