Judge voids controversial constitutional amendment on Utah’s Nov. 5 ballot

Date:

Judge Dianna M. Gibson listens to arguments during an injunction hearing in 3rd District Court in Salt Lake City, Wednesday, Sept. 11, 2024, challenging the inclusion of constitutional Amendment D on the general election ballot. (Pool photo by Chris Samuels/The Salt Lake Tribune)

In a remarkable ruling issued Thursday morning — the second time in less than three months the courts have rebuked the Utah Legislature — a judge declared a controversial constitutional amendment question on the Nov. 5 ballot void. 

After hearing oral arguments less than 24 hours prior, 3rd District Court Judge Dianna Gibson sided with plaintiffs who have been in a yearslong legal battle alleging the Utah Legislature has engaged in unlawful gerrymandering and violated the Utah Constitution when it repealed and replaced Better Boundaries’ 2018 voter-approved ballot initiative that required lawmakers to use an independent redistricting commission. 

When the Utah Supreme Court issued a ruling in that case in July remanding the case back to district court and set limits on the Utah Legislature’s power to repeal and replace government reform initiatives, the Republican-controlled Utah Legislature reacted with defiance. The Legislature called itself into an “emergency” special session last month to sidestep the Utah Supreme Court’s interpretation of the constitution and instead ask voters to rewrite the Utah Constitution in favor of lawmakers’ interpretation of their power over ballot initiatives. 

Anti-gerrymandering groups then sued, alleging Amendment D’s ballot language written by top Republican legislative leaders was “false and misleading” because it mischaracterized the true effect of the constitutional amendment. While the ballot question said the amendment would “strengthen” and “clarify” Utah’s ballot initiative process if passed, plaintiffs argued in court it would actually “weaken” voter initiatives because it would enshrine in the Utah Constitution the Legislature’s power to change or repeal any ballot initiative. 

Plaintiffs also successfully argued state officials failed to meet publication requirements for proposed constitutional amendments. The Utah Constitution explicitly states the Legislature “shall cause” the text of constitutional amendments to be “published in at least one newspaper in every county of the state, where a newspaper is published, for two months immediately preceding the next general election.” 

The judge ruled the Utah Legislature failed to meet those requirements. 

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

“While the Legislature has every right to request the amendment, it has the duty and the obligation to accurately communicate the ‘subject matter’ of the proposed amendment to voters and to publish the text of the amendment to voters and to publish the text of the amendment in a newspaper in each county two months before the election,” Gibson wrote in her order. “It has failed to do both.” 

State election officials, whose attorneys had urged the judge to issue a ruling Wednesday night because they needed to begin printing the first batches of ballots Thursday, accepted the judge’s ruling. 

“We appreciate the court’s prompt attention and serious consideration of this matter. State and county election officials will move forward as ordered,” Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson said in a prepared statement. 

Better Boundaries board member Ryan Bell issued a celebratory statement in reaction to the ruling. 

“Amendment D was a deceptive power grab written by two leaders of the legislature. We applaud the Court’s decision and interpretation of the Utah Constitution to void Amendment D on the November ballot,” Bell said. “Amending our founding document should never be shrouded with misleading language and rushed in this fashion. Utahns overwhelmingly want and deserve a proper balance of power in our state government and the Court agreed.” 

Utah Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, and House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, issued another scathing statement in response to the ruling, saying they were “extremely disappointed by the lower court’s policymaking action from the bench.”

“It’s disheartening that the courts — not the 1.9 million Utah voters — will determine the future policies of our state,” the House speaker and Senate president said. “This underscores our concerns about governance by initiative as an out-of-state interest group from Washington D.C., with seemingly unlimited funds, blocked Utah voters from voicing their opinions at the ballot box.” 

Their statement appears to be referring to Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit based in the nation’s capital with a mission of advancing “democracy through the law, fighting for every American’s right to participate in and affect the democratic process,” according to its website. The Campaign Legal Center joined the League of Women Voters of Utah and other plaintiffs’ in the lawsuit fighting to void Amendment D. 

Adams and Schultz’s statement continued, going on to question the judge’s “impartiality” and claiming “interference” in the election. 

 “The court’s actions have introduced significant uncertainty into the electoral process, raising concerns about the impartiality and timing of judicial interventions. Such interference during an ongoing election undermines public confidence in the integrity of the process,” they said. “The court is denying the right of the people to vote and should not be exerting undue influence on this election.” 

Utah’s top Republican legislative leaders said they would continue to fight. A Senate spokesperson said state officials plan to appeal the decision, which could bring the case before the Utah Supreme Court. 

“We will not stop fighting for Utahns,” Adams and Schultz said. “It’s critical we find a path forward that safeguards our state from external influence and keeps Utah’s future in Utah’s hands. We will continue to exhaust all options to prevent foreign entities from altering our state and clarify the over a century-long constitutional practice, including our appeal to the Utah Supreme Court. We urge them to undo this wrong and preserve the voices of Utahns.” 

Read the judge’s full ruling here: 

document (28)

 

This is a breaking story and will be updated. 

DONATE: SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST

Share post:

Popular

More like this
Related

Where 49ers would pick in 2025 NFL Draft after loss to Dolphins

Where 49ers would pick in 2025 NFL Draft after...

Commitment to golf at Harvard a no-brainer for Mayo standout Isaac Ahn

Dec. 22—Dartmouth was knocking on Isaac Ahn's door.Columbia, too.In...

Maiocco’s Observations: Deebo resembles old self in 49ers’ loss

Maiocco's Observations: Deebo resembles old self in 49ers' loss...

Bills don’t play a great game, but avoid a bad loss by coming back to beat Patriots

The NFL season is long. There are bound to...