SALT LAKE CITY — A judge has voided Amendment A, striking it from the November ballot.
In a ruling issues Wednesday, 3rd District Court Judge Laura Scott cited a recent Utah Supreme Court ruling on Amendment D as the reason why.
"The Court finds the per curiam opinion of the Utah Supreme Court in the League of Women Voters of Utah, et al. v. Utah State Legislature, et al., to be controlling as to the newspaper publication issue asserted in the seventh claim for relief in the Supplemental Complaint. In light of that controlling opinion, Legislative Defendants acknowledge that there is no basis to argue that the newspaper publication requirement of Article XXIII of the Utah Constitution was met with respect to Amendment A," Judge Scott wrote.
Because ballots have already been printed, amendments A and D will still show up on voters' mail-in ballots. However, any votes cast on them will simply not be counted.
Amendment A would have removed the earmark on the income tax for public education. Republican leaders in the Utah State Legislature argued that it was necessary to solve problems with budget stability. Sales tax is much more volatile and the income tax is a steady revenue stream to fund essential government services. If it passed, the legislature had agreed to remove the state portion of the sales tax on food.
But a coalition of groups called "Utahns for Student Success,"led by the Utah Education Association, fought it. They had already started running TV ads and putting up signs against Amendment A when the ruling hit.
"Voiding Amendment A is a significant victory for Utah voters and public education. Amendment A was a power grab by state politicians aimed at diverting public money from public schools to unaccountable religious private school vouchers. It was written to be deliberately misleading, hiding its true impact on public schools," the group said in a statement. "Utahns for Student Success thanks our partners and community members who united to support public education. This victory underscores the need to protect public education and ensure voters receive timely, honest, and accurate information when making critical decisions for our children’s future."
The Utah Supreme Court voided Amendment D when it found the legislature did not follow the state constitution's requirement that proposed amendments be published in a newspaper for two months preceding an election. Lawyers for the state argued that in the 21st century, the definition of a newspaper is different.
Amendment D was run in response to a Utah Supreme Court ruling on citizen ballot initiatives that found the legislature overstepped its power when it overruled a citizen initiative on independent redistricting. The legislature called itself into a special session and ran the amendment, arguing that the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling could lead to a flood of citizen initiatives fueled by out of state money and tie their hands to fix problems with any that would pass. Opponents accused lawmakers of a "power grab" and argued the language they put on the amendment was misleading to voters.
The courts agreed and voided Amendment D.
After that ruling, Amendment A opponents went to court and used the same arguments. In an interview with FOX 13 News as the ruling came down, House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said he was disappointed. He also expressed concern about how they address publication issues for future constitutional amendments when the definition of a newspaper has changed so dramatically since 1895.
"Nobody reads the newspaper anymore. It’s unfortunate the opposition found that loophole and now the voters don’t get to make that decision," he said. "These are things that will be addressed in the upcoming legislative session and future sessions to come but definitely, things need to be talked about."
Speaker Schultz criticized the Utah Education Association and the National Education Association for funding the anti-Amendment A campaign. He pointed out some education groups did support it.
"Unfortunately, the people of Utah don’t get to make that decision. That was taken away by the courts," he said. "I'm disappointed."
