Current:Home > FinanceUtah Supreme Court to decide viability of a ballot question deemed ‘counterfactual’ by lower court-InfoLens
Utah Supreme Court to decide viability of a ballot question deemed ‘counterfactual’ by lower court
View Date:2024-12-23 12:30:54
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The Utah Supreme Court is poised to decide whether a proposed constitutional amendment that asks voters to cede power to lawmakers over ballot measures is written clearly and should be counted on the November ballot.
Attorneys for the Legislature and a coalition of voting rights groups argued Wednesday before the state Supreme Court after a lower court ruled earlier this month that voters should not decide on the consequential ballot question this year.
Republican legislative leaders are asking the five-justice panel to overturn District Judge Dianna Gibson’s ruling and put Amendment D back before the public. But opponents of the measure warn that it is written in a way that could trick voters into giving up their power to pass meaningful legislation.
If the amendment is revived and approved this fall by a majority of Utah voters, it would give lawmakers constitutional authority to rewrite voter-approved ballot measures or repeal them entirely. Lawmakers also could apply their new power to initiatives from past election cycles.
The summary that voters will see on their ballots only asks if the state constitution should be changed to “strengthen the initiative process” and to clarify the roles of legislators and voters.
Gibson ruled in early September that the language of the ballot question, penned by Republican legislative leaders, was “counterfactual” and did not disclose to voters the unfettered power they would be handing to state lawmakers. She also said the Legislature had failed to publish the ballot question in newspapers across the state during the required time frame.
Taylor Meehan, an attorney for the Legislature, defended the proposed amendment before the Utah Supreme Court on Wednesday, arguing that a reasonably intelligent voter would be able to understand the intent of the ballot question.
Justice Paige Petersen said the amendment would remove constitutional protections for Utah’s current ballot initiative process, and she asked Meehan to point out where in the ballot question voters are informed that they will be giving up those protections.
Meehan said the summary that will appear on the ballot does not have to educate voters about the effects of the amendment. The summary is only meant to help the voter identify the amendment and point them to the full text, she said, agreeing with Justice John Pearce that the phrasing cannot be counterfactual.
Mark Gaber, an attorney for the League of Women Voters, argued voters would not assume the ballot summary is false and cannot be expected to go searching for accurate information. He argued the language omits key details and is counterfactual because it claims to strengthen the initiative process when it actually eliminates voters’ ability to pass laws without legislative interference.
Justices did not provide a timeline for when they would rule on the ballot question’s viability.
Because of ballot-printing deadlines, the proposed amendment will appear on Utah ballots in November regardless of the Supreme Court ruling, but votes may or may not be counted.
The amendment seeks to circumvent another Utah Supreme Court ruling from July, which found that lawmakers have very limited authority to change laws approved through citizen initiatives.
Frustrated by that decision, legislative leaders in August used their broadly worded emergency powers to call a special session in which both chambers swiftly approved placing an amendment on the November ballot. Democrats decried the decision as a “power grab,” while many Republicans argued it would be dangerous to have certain laws on the books that could not be substantially changed.
Republican Gov. Spencer Cox said last week during his monthly televised news conference at KUED-TV that he thought the lower court opinion was “compelling.” He declined to say whether he thought the ballot question was misleading and said he would let the high court decide.
“It is important that the language is clear and conveys what the actual changes will do,” Cox told reporters. “I do hope that, eventually, the people of Utah will get a chance to weigh in and decide one way or another how this is going to go. I think that’s very important, but it is important that we get it right.”
veryGood! (784)
Related
- Powerball winning numbers for Nov. 13 drawing: Jackpot rises to $113 million
- Jason Kelce responds to Jalen Hurts 'commitment' comments on 'New Heights' podcast
- Minnesota program to provide free school meals for all kids is costing the state more than expected
- Nantz, Childress, Ralph and Steve Smith named to 2024 North Carolina Sports Hall of Fame class
- She was found dead while hitchhiking in 1974. An arrest has finally been made.
- An author gets in way over his head in 'American Fiction'
- Lionel Messi's 2024 schedule: Inter Miami in MLS, Argentina in Copa America
- The Denver Zoo didn't know who the father of a baby orangutan was. They called in Maury Povich to deliver the paternity test results
- It's cozy gaming season! Video game updates you may have missed, including Stardew Valley
- Challengers attack Georgia’s redrawn congressional and legislative districts in court hearing
Ranking
- Charles Hanover: Caution, Bitcoin May Be Entering a Downward Trend!
- Sue Bird, Diana Taurasi will host Christmas Day alt-cast of Bucks-Knicks game, per report
- California’s top prosecutor won’t seek charges in 2020 fatal police shooting of Bay Area man
- Vigil held for 5-year-old migrant boy who died at Chicago shelter
- American Idol’s Triston Harper, 16, Expecting a Baby With Wife Paris Reed
- Your single largest payday may be a 2023 tax filing away. File early to get a refund sooner
- A white couple who burned a cross in their yard facing Black neighbors’ home are investigated by FBI
- Methamphetamine, fentanyl drive record homeless deaths in Portland, Oregon, annual report finds
Recommendation
-
Candidates line up for special elections to replace Virginia senators recently elected to US House
-
Look Back on the Most Dramatic Celeb Transformations of 2023
-
In 2023, opioid settlement funds started being paid out. Here's how it's going
-
A St. Louis nursing home closes suddenly, prompting wider concerns over care
-
Advocacy group sues Tennessee over racial requirements for medical boards
-
Dunkin' employees in Texas threatened irate customer with gun, El Paso police say
-
Khloe Kardashian Unveils New Hair Color and Extensions That Will Have You Buzzing
-
Justice Department sues Texas developer accused of luring Hispanic homebuyers into predatory loans