Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Student Clubs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances bill setting statewide criteria for school clubs after heated debate
Summary
The Utah Senate substituted and advanced Senate Bill 97, which sets state-level criteria schools may use to evaluate student clubs, after floor debate over whether gay–straight alliance clubs recruit students; the substitute moved to third-reading on a 18–11 roll call.
The Utah Senate on the floor Thursday advanced a substitute to Senate Bill 97, a measure that outlines criteria schools may use when evaluating extracurricular student clubs. Sponsor Senator Scott Butters argued the bill does not outlaw any club but instead provides uniform standards so smaller school districts need not hire repeated legal advice to defend local decisions.
Butters said, “The first thing it doesn't do is outlaw any club,” and described the substitute as a way to “put its arms around all clubs” so each of Utah’s 40 school districts can apply consistent criteria. He also asked the Senate to resolve into a Committee of the Whole to hear testimony from a constituent, and the body agreed.
Opponents and defenders sparred over whether certain clubs — often described in debate as gay–straight alliance (GSA) groups — amount to support groups that counter bullying or to venues that, in some senators’ view, might “indoctrinate” students. Senator McCoy, disputing evidence handed out by the sponsor, said some of the materials originated with discredited researcher Paul Cameron and should not be treated as authoritative. McCoy said, “These clubs are simply places where the students can come together … We should respect and give dignity to those people.”
Senator Mancel and others recounted personal anecdotes they described as examples of students being targeted or influenced. Sponsor Butters cited organizations such as Lambda Legal and noted the ACLU’s role in litigation over school clubs; he said the purpose is to provide criteria that reduce the risk of repeated lawsuits for small districts.
After committee-of-the-whole testimony and floor summations, the Senate voted to read the first substitute for a third time, with the roll call showing 18 yes votes and 11 no votes. The substitute will proceed through the Senate’s third-reading process.
The debate focused on balancing district autonomy, litigation risk, and the protections or activities of student support groups. The Senate record shows numerous senators asked for clarifications about whether the substitute explicitly targeted sexual orientation; sponsor Butters and other floor statements said the bill’s language is written to apply uniformly to any club and does not explicitly single out gay or lesbian students.
Next steps: the bill was advanced to third reading for final consideration in a future floor session.
