Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judiciary Chief Justice Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah Senate advances bill shifting chief justice selection to governor after heated debate
Summary
The Senate passed first substitute Senate Bill 109 on a 15‑13 vote to replace internal selection of the Utah Supreme Court chief justice with gubernatorial appointment to a six‑year term; supporters called it a needed check, opponents said it threatens judicial independence.
The Utah Senate advanced first substitute Senate Bill 109 after an extended floor debate that split the chamber 15‑13, with one senator absent. The measure would change the process for selecting the chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court from an election by the justices to appointment by the governor for a six‑year term timed to begin opposite the governor’s term.
Sponsor Senator Scott Jenkins argued the current internal election process “poisons the well” among justices and creates longstanding animosity, saying the substitute lengthens the chief justice’s term to six years and staggers it to reduce turnover tied to gubernatorial cycles. “Allowing the governor to select the chief justice, I believe, is a good idea,” Jenkins said in floor remarks defending the change.
Opponents warned the change would weaken judicial independence and blur separation of powers. “Make no mistake, this bill will have a chilling effect on the independence of our court,” Senator McAdams said during debate, urging colleagues to preserve the court’s role as a co‑equal branch of government. Senator Morgan asked whether giving the governor additional influence was necessary given that governors already appoint the justices; Morgan said she would not support the bill.
Other senators questioned the scope and motivation for the change. Senator Jones asked whether the governor had requested the bill; Jenkins said the governor was neutral. Senator Dayton noted the sponsor’s statement that 14 other states use a similar appointment method and pressed Jenkins on why the term was extended from four to six years; Jenkins said the longer term was intended to bolster the position’s independence.
The substitute bill also alters administrative timing: the chief justice’s term would be six years and would begin on a date opposite the governor’s term to reduce the likelihood a single governor appoints multiple chiefs in a term. Jenkins said the substitute was intended to introduce a modest executive check over an office that, in Utah, also serves as the judiciary’s chief administrative officer.
After debate and a floor summation by Jenkins, the Senate recorded the vote. The Senate passed the first substitute bill on a 15‑13 vote with one senator absent; the measure was placed on the third‑reading calendar for final action.
The bill’s supporters said it mirrors arrangements used in other states and would reduce internal conflict among justices; critics said it represents an inappropriate incursion by the executive branch into judicial leadership. The Senate did not adopt any amendment on the floor to resolve those concerns during the session.
The bill now moves toward final floor consideration on the third‑reading calendar. If adopted by the Senate in final reading, the measure would advance to the House for consideration under the legislative process.
