The Legislature has a history of ignoring the will of the people, restricting our right to legislate as given by the state Constitution, and grabbing power from the other branches of our government.\u00a0 Here is a brief history of how that has occurred with the Independent Redistricting Commission (Prop 4), Initiative and Referenda rules, term limits, ignoring or amending the state Constitution at will, and more.<\/p>\n<\/div>
The Legislature passed SB200 to repeal Prop 4 and replace it with an advisory commission whose map recommendations they could ignore. Note that Prop 4 allowed the Legislature to choose alternate maps that conformed with the guidelines of Prop 4 as long as the gave the public a detailed accounting of why their maps were better.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
The Independent Redistricting Commission and the Legislative Redistricting Committee ran in parallel, a wasteful duplication of taxpayer dollars that offered a night and day contrast of governance styles.<\/p>\n
On one hand, the independent commission was an example of everything we would want good governance to be, deliberative, open, listening and considering inputs, incorporating suggestions or clearly communicating why they couldn\u2019t or wouldn\u2019t.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, the redistricting committee was the opposite of transparent. They toured and had discussions, but refused to show the maps they were working on until the last minute. Even minor suggestions were dismissed outright without consideration or explanation. Prop 4 guidelines were ignored.\u00a0 People’s suggestions were rejected consistently.<\/p>\n
Summit County \u2014 with a population the size of a single state House district \u2014 went from being split across 3 House districts to being split across 4 State House districts, disenfranchising Summit County voters at the state level. Millcreek and Salt Lake County were split across 4 different US congressional districts. Rural Utah was cracked into multiple districts diluting their voice and prioritizing the Wasatch front in all 4 districts.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
\nArticle 1, Section 2 Article I, Section 2. [All political power inherent in the people.]\nAll political power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The Supreme Court rules that the legislature has a high bar if they want to amend any initiative that modifies the government, and passes it back to the district court to determine if the legislature met that high bar with SB200.<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Aug 2024 - Legislature pass SJR401 to amend Article I of Constitution and limit the people's right to reform our government<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
The proposed language would read:<\/p>\n\nAll political power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform their government through the processes established in Article VI, Section 1, Subsection (2), or through Article XXIII<\/b><\/u> as the public welfare may require.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
They also passed SB4003 which would have gone into effect if Amendment D was approved by the voters. SB4003 describes how the legislature can amend initiatives and would give the legislature authority to ignore the will of the people: \u201c(b) If, during the general session next following the passage of a law submitted to the people by initiative petition, the Legislature amends the law, the Legislature: (i) shall give deference to the initiative by amending the law in a manner that, in the Legislature’s determination, leaves intact the general purpose of the initiative; and (ii) notwithstanding Subsection (3)(b)(i), may amend the law in any manner determined necessary by the Legislature to mitigate an adverse fiscal impact of the initiative.\u201d<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Oct 2024 - Courts remove Amendment D from Ballot<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
Language on the ballot read:<\/p>\n\n\u201cShould the Utah Constitution be changed to strengthen the initiative process by:<\/p>\n
\n
- Prohibiting foreign influence on ballot initiatives and referendums.<\/li>\n
- Clarifying the voters and legislative bodies\u2019 ability to amend laws.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
If approved, state law would also be changed to:<\/p>\n
\n
- Allow Utah citizens 50% more time to gather signatures for a statewide referendum.<\/li>\n
- Establish requirements for the legislature to follow the intent of a ballot initiative.”<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Additionally the Amendment not properly noticed according to Article XXIII of the state Constitution which reads<\/p>\n
\n\u201c\u2026and the Legislature shall cause the same 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, at which time the said amendment or amendments shall be submitted to the electors of the state for their approval or rejection,\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Early 2025 - Legislature proposes to amend Article XXIII of the Utah Constitution<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
Legislature proposes to amend Article XXIII of the state constitution to instead read:<\/p>\n\u201c\u2026and the Legislature shall cause the same to be published, in a manner provided by statute, for 60 calendar days<\/strong> <\/span>immediately preceding the next general election, at which time the said amendment or amendments shall be submitted to the electors of the state for their approval or rejection, and if\u2026\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Legislature also looks to limit people\u2019s power by amending the constitution to require an initiative to pass by at least 60% if the item is tax-related:<\/p>\n
Notwithstanding Subsection (2)(a)(i)(A), initiated legislation that is subject to a vote that occurs after November 1, 2026, shall be adopted upon approval of at least 60% of those voting on the legislation if the initiated legislation includes:<\/p>\n
\n
- an expansion of an existing tax to include additional items or transactions subject to the tax;<\/li>\n
- an increase in an existing tax rate; or<\/li>\n
- for a property tax, a change to the tax rate that causes the tax rate to decrease less than it would under current law.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Aug 2025 - Court rules that SB200 does not meet high bar<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\nCourt rules that SB200 does not meet the high bar and thus cannot repeal Prop 4, causing Prop 4 to become the state law. Judge orders the legislature to draw and submit a map that conforms to Prop 4 guidelines and provides remedies if the legislature fails to do so in time<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Oct 2025 - Legislature submits map to court and amends Prop 4 again<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\nLegislature submits a map to the court that does not meet the standards of Prop 4.<\/p>\n
Legislature also holds a special session to amend Prop 4 to adopt a standard of bias that mathematically only allow Republican gerrymanders to pass the standard.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Nov 2025 - Court rules that Legislature's map does not meet Prop 4 standards<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
Judge rules that legislature\u2019s submitted map does not conform to Prop 4 and enacts an alternate map prepared by the plaintiffs.<\/div><\/div><\/div>