Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Colorado

State of Colorado, The v. United States Department of Justice

District of ColoradoJohn L. KaneDecided April 23, 2020

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency Department of Justice Read by a model
Moreover, DOJ has a duty to allocate Byrne JAG funds pursuant to the statutory formula.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
issue a writ of mandamus compelling DOJ to issue Colorado’s FY 2018 Byrne JAG award without the challenged conditions and to disburse the funds immediately.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, I grant Colorado’s motion and deny DOJ’s motion.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
DOJ and Defendant Attorney General William Barr move to dismiss the Amended Complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 (Defs.’ Mot., ECF No. 26).
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Colorado moves for summary judgment on all of its claims, and DOJ moves to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment.
Disposition Granted in the applicant's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 26) is DENIED, and Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 35) is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
Accordingly, I grant Colorado’s motion and deny DOJ’s motion.
The other claims Relief ordered Read by a model
For the reasons detailed below, I find the challenged conditions unlawful. Accordingly, I grant Colorado’s motion and deny DOJ’s motion.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Tenth Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.