Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policing Use Of Force topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah Senate rejects use-of-force revisions after sharp floor debate
Summary
The Senate voted down third-substitute House Bill 154, a package of use-of-force revisions that would have clarified officer announcements and public timelines for reporting; supporters said it increased transparency, opponents said it risked officer safety in split-second deadly-force situations.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Senate on March 5 rejected third-substitute House Bill 154, a set of revisions to the state's use-of-force rules, after more than an hour of floor debate and questions from both defenders of the bill and senators who warned it could create new risks for officers.
Senator J. Kitchen, the bill sponsor, described the measure as an effort to set timelines for investigations and to make certain information public on county or district attorney websites. "It provides a little bit more clarity on what a verbal warning is when use of force is contemplated or used," Kitchen said during her presentation.
Opponents repeatedly raised concerns about language in the bill that asks officers to provide verbal warnings "if feasible" before the use of deadly force. Senator Sandle said the requirement gives him "great pause," arguing that in intense moments an officer should not be expected to worry about whether they pronounced a warning. "I don't want them to be obligated in the back of their mind to think, did I identify myself and did I give a clear warning of my intent to use a firearm?" he said.
Senator Owens declared a conflict of interest before explaining he has a son who is an officer and urged caution; other senators — including supporters who said the bill was negotiated with law enforcement and prosecutors — pressed that the draft had protections and that the policy aligned with training and reporting improvements.
On the final roll call, the third substitute House Bill 154 failed to pass the Senate. The president announced the bill had received 13 nay votes and 15 nay votes in the tally that followed the recorded roll call, and the measure was sent to staff for filing.
The debate reflected a larger theme this session: balancing increased public reporting and procedural clarity with law-enforcement concerns about operational discretion in rapidly evolving, potentially deadly encounters. The Senate will return to related policing bills later in the session.
