Justices rule voucher amendment cannot stand on its own
Utah Supreme Court says voters should decide yes or no
In a rare move, the Utah Supreme Court ruled Friday that the public will have a straight up or down vote on a universal voucher program because the amendment law, HB174, which some said could enact a voucher program by itself, cannot stand on its own.
"Should HB148 be rejected by the voters under the referendum before us , HB174 would be without legal meaning," Associate Chief Justice Michael J. Wilkins said in the ruling.
The ruling came just hours after the high court heard arguments from both voucher supporters and opponents on what the ballot language should be. It usually takes weeks for justices to come back with a decision.
Those on both sides of the voucher issue say they are pleased that the voucher issue now has more clarity, though voucher supporters were hoping to nix the referendum vote all together.
"We did it right, we did it the right way," said Carmen Snow, Utah PTA president and a member of the anti-voucher Utahns for Public Schools. "The message here is that the people have a say in issues that are as vital as this and that are going to concern the children of Utah."
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has said that had the high court not made it an up-or-down vote this November, then he might have had to call legislators to act in a special session.
That won't be needed now, said Lisa Roskelley, Huntsman's spokeswoman, who said the governor now wants people to educate themselves about vouchers.
Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said he was not disappointed that the Supreme Court disagreed with his legal opinion that HB174 stands alone and would implement the voucher program without HB148.
"I'm glad they ruled so quickly," said Shurtleff. "Sooner was better than later on this."
Shurtleff has been on the forefront of the legal battle — deciding that the State Board of Education had to implement vouchers last month because of the extensive voucher language, originally in HB148, that was repeated in HB174. HB174 can't be subject to a referendum vote because it passed by a referendum-proof two-thirds vote.
The high court slapped that idea down Friday, saying that HB174 was only an amendment to HB148 and so could not stand on its own. And though it is not subject to a referendum vote, it is subject to the consequences of a referendum on HB148.
"The courts agree with me maybe half the time, disagree with me half that time. That's how it goes," said Shurtleff.
You can be the first to comment on this story.