SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court grilled lawyers for the legislature and a pair of citizen advocacy groups over the powers of citizen ballot initiatives and whether Utah's legislature trampled over them in approving new congressional boundaries.
On Tuesday, the five justices on the state's top court heard arguments in the legislature's appeal of a lower court's decision to keep the lawsuit alive. The Utah State Legislature wants the lawsuit thrown out.
An attorney for the legislature faced some tough questions from the justices about whether the Utah State Legislature went too far in the redistricting process, crafting congressional district maps that critics say is partisan gerrymandering favoring Republicans.
In 2018, voters approved Proposition 4, which created an independent redistricting commission. The legislature passed a bill, dubbed a "compromise," that allowed the commission to draw maps and the legislature to consider them. However, the legislature disregarded all those maps in favor of their own which split Democrat-heavy Salt Lake County among the four districts. Lawmakers argued that the maps reflected a mix of urban and rural interests among Utah's four congressional representatives.
The League of Women Voters of Utah, Mormon Women for Ethical Government and seven other people who live in the districts filed a lawsuit, accusing lawmakers of partisan gerrymandering. In arguments on Tuesday, the justices peppered attorneys about the power — and limits — of citizen ballot initiatives and the legislature's actions.
An attorney representing the Utah State Legislature argued that the legislature has the authority to modify citizen ballot initiatives and the constitutional power to draw lines in redistricting.
Justice John Pearce pressed the attorney for the state on what voters wanted and if the legislature granted that. Chief Justice Matthew Durrant questioned whether a citizen ballot initiative was essentially a "super law" that could override the legislature in perpetuity.
"People pass an initiative, the legislature changes it... well, then the referendum process is available. That seems like an empty promise," he said. "I meant that could continue indefinitely. Ultimately under the system you’re suggesting, the legislature is always going to have the final say, is it fair to say?"
"As a general matter, that ping-ponging back and forth is just part of democracy," Meehan replied.
Justice Paige Petersen questioned if anytime that citizens have an initiative, could the legislature just repeal it?
"To say that there’s some sort of constitutional limit is to read something into the constitution that isn’t there. That’s not to say there isn’t political limits," Meehan said, arguing people could vote legislators out in the next election cycle if they didn't like it.
But Mark Gaber, an attorney for the League of Women Voters, Mormon Women for Ethical Government and the individual plaintiffs, argued the legislature has indeed overstepped its powers.
"What has happened here is the legislature has for decades engaged in this anti-democratic distortion of the process and the people said, 'We have had enough,'" he argued to the Court.
Asked about the remedy of voting lawmakers out of office, Gaber replied: "Once you take the power from the people? You have it. The legislature can draw the lines for themselves, it doesn’t matter what the people want."
The justices took the case under advisement with no timeline for a ruling. What the Court decides could impact future election cycles.
Outside the courtroom, people on both sides of the redistricting case expressed optimism the Utah Supreme Court would rule in their favor.
"At the end of the day, the legislature made a policy decision," House Speaker Brad Wilson, R-Kaysville, told FOX 13 News. "Our policy decision was it was in the best interests of the state of Utah to have all four members of our delegation represent parts of rural Utah and parts of urban Utah."
Kathy Biele of the League of Women Voters of Utah said she disagreed with the "ping-pong" nature of initiatives and referendums and elections.
"How many times does a voter have to go back and tell the legislature what we want?" she said. "I'm convinced that the justices will do the right thing."
Katie Wright, the executive director of Better Boundaries, which sponsored Prop. 4, said she left feeling "fantastic" in the way arguments went. She said Utahns have already gone to a big effort to rid partisan gerrymandering from its process in passing the initiative.
But asked if they would seek yet another citizen ballot initiative should the Court rule against them, Wright told FOX 13 News: "I look forward to hearing the opinion of the Court. Our mission at Better Boundaries is to bring independent redistricting to Utah. Of course, all options are on the table."
