Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Protective Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House refuses to recede on protective-orders bill, sends conferees to negotiate with Senate
Summary
After heated debate about whether recent House amendments would hinder victims’ access to permanent protective orders, the House refused to recede from its changes to first substitute Senate Bill 208 and authorized a conference committee to resolve differences with the Senate.
The Utah House of Representatives on March 3 refused to recede from House amendments to first substitute Senate Bill 208, a bill addressing cohabitant abuse and protective orders, and authorized the Speaker to appoint a conference committee to meet with Senate conferees.
Representative Bennion moved that the House recede from its amendments so the Senate could proceed, but several members opposed the move. Representative Cox argued the House “intended” to strengthen protective orders and that removing the amendments would return the bill to a version that could reduce protections for victims. Representative Swallow countered that some House amendments carried a fiscal note requiring evidentiary hearings in every court and could “kill the bill,” and said the changes were not essential to the bill’s immediate progress.
After an extended exchange about specific amendments — including ones that require corroborating evidence for some orders — Chair ruled the motion to recede failed on voice vote. The House then voted to refuse to recede and to authorize the Speaker to appoint a conference committee. The Speaker later announced Representatives Bennion, Swallow and Goodfellow as the House members on that committee.
The action preserves the House’s amendments while sending negotiators to the Senate, a common path when the two bodies disagree on changes to the same measure. Supporters of the House amendments said they were necessary to ensure corroboration when appropriate; opponents warned that some provisions could create fiscal or procedural barriers for courts and inadvertently limit victims’ access to permanent orders.
Next steps: the appointed conference committee will meet with Senate conferees to try to reach a compromise on the language of SB208. No final resolution was recorded on the House floor that day.
