Utah House rejects motion to open E-Verify bill file after heated debate

Representative Mark Sandstrom moved to open a bill file to revisit Utah’s E-Verify implementation, saying the proposal would align state penalties with a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling by using business-license suspensions rather than fines. Sandstrom said the measure would avoid penalties on individuals and would exempt agriculture, calling it a "measured, prudent approach" and arguing it is consistent with the Court’s guidance.

Opponents pressed for more detail before opening a file. Representative Litvak said the body needed more specificity about what changes the bill would contain to make an informed procedural decision. Representative Wright said the issue had been exhaustively debated previously, warned of litigation costs and court activity tied to earlier enforcement efforts, and argued the Immigration Commission should complete its review before reopening the matter.

Representative Vickers said he supported reopening the file but noted that the Immigration Commission had requested the legislature not proceed until its findings were available. Representative Sandstrom replied that the goal was to align state enforcement with a Supreme Court decision and that the change would target business sanctions, not fines on workers, and would include exemptions for agriculture.

After a motion for the previous question cut off debate, members debated briefly and then proceeded to a roll-call division. The motion to allow Representative Sandstrom to open a bill file received 36 yes votes and 37 no votes and therefore failed. The House did not open the E-Verify bill file and moved on with its calendar.

The immediate procedural next step was no further action on the E-Verify file that day; any future change would require a new motion or a bill properly introduced and referred through committee.