- The Utah State Bar opposes bills it says threaten judicial independence.
- Bar leaders urge focusing resources on lower courts facing high caseloads and backlogs.
- Several bills dealing with the judiciary are still to be considered as lawmakers call for more transparency.
SALT LAKE CITY — Leaders of the Utah State Bar reiterated their opposition to a slate of bills they say would remake the court system and threaten to erode the judiciary's independence.
However, the timing of a news conference Tuesday at the Capitol raised eyebrows since one of the most closely watched bills — which adds two new justices to the Utah Supreme Court — is already law. Gov. Spencer Cox signed SB134 over the weekend.
Still, members of the state bar, which licenses attorneys in the state, gathered at the Capitol to criticize the new law and speak out against several other proposals that have surfaced just weeks into the legislative session. While the bar has concerns about what each of the individual proposals would change, one top leader told KSL the collective impact amounts to "an all-out attack on the independence of the judiciary."
"The justice system does not belong to judges or lawyers or the Legislature or the government," said Elizabeth Wright, executive director of the Utah State Bar. "It belongs to the people of Utah. Our role as lawyers — as officers of the court — today is to ensure that the reforms proposed to the court strengthen the system rather than undermine the public confidence in it."
The measure expanding the Supreme Court also adds judges to the Court of Appeals and district courts. But the bar argued resources should be focused solely on the lower courts, which face higher caseloads and longer backlogs.
Several other proposals dealing with the judiciary are still working their way through the process, including a bill that would remove all criminal defense attorneys from the state Sentencing Commission and replace them with prosecutors and law enforcement.
Other bills would require a two-thirds vote to retain judges, create a panel of randomly assigned district court judges to hear constitutional issues, give the governor more power over choosing judicial nominees, and allow the Legislature to initiate a special retention election if a judge engages in certain conduct that lawmakers don't like.
Daniel Woodruff, KSLKim Cordova, the president of the bar, specifically criticized lawmakers' attempts to change the nomination process for judges, saying the current system should be protected to preserve "the integrity of our justice system."
"What we do know is that if you cut away bit by bit into the Constitution and the rule of law, then not only does the judiciary suffer, but our society suffers," she said.
Asked about the slate of bills proposed in a daily media availability before the bar's press conference, Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, R-Sandy, said lawmakers will consider which policies are needed and "take a look at each of these as they come across."
Senate Majority Whip Chris Wilson, R-Logan, said his constituents are broadly concerned about transparency in the court system.
"I send out a survey every year," he said. "Judicial transparency is always high among my constituents, so it'll be something that we need to continue to work on."
The legislative session ends on March 6.
