It’s our property now.

Another blow against private property.

Colorado’s smoking ban was upheld Tuesday by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.

A three-judge panel decided that the state’s Clean Indoor Act did not violate the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution when it provided exemptions to Denver International Airport’s smoking areas. …

“The district court concluded, and we agree, that the State of Colorado has offered a rational basis for its distinction between airport smoking concessions and the establishments owned, operated and/or serviced by plaintiffs,” the opinion says. DIA smokers “. . . have no options as to where they can smoke because they have no real opportunity or ability to travel to a location outside the DIA area.”

Jason Dunn, who served as special assistant attorney general for the state on the case said: “Whether you love the smoking ban or hate it, there is little doubt that the court correctly refused to wade into a policy question that is the sole province of the legislature.”

Really? Policy question are the “sole province” of legislators in the state? Citizens have no recourse through the courts in public policy questions? Interesting. I wonder if Dunn has the same opinion on Colorado’s infamous “Amendment 2,” which, in effect, banned any law prevented banning discrimination against gays. It was ruled unconstitutional. Why did the citizens wade into that battle? Or thousands of others.

Joel Spector, an attorney for the coalition, said he was “very disappointed by the ruling. I believe that restaurants and bars are private property, and private property owners should be able to decide how to use their own property. The ruling is scary for people who value to choose what they do inside their own property.”

What an antiquated notion.