Court systems in this country often talk about the importance of independence. There are many misunderstandings regarding the meaning of judicial independence. Such misunderstandings can lead to a lack of trust and confidence in the work of the judiciary. Judicial independence and an understanding of what that means are critical for the proper functioning of the Utah judiciary.
Judicial independence means that judges make decisions based on the facts in individual cases and what the law requires, not based on political or social pressure or individual beliefs. Judicial independence protects judges’ freedom to evaluate the facts and the law in individual cases and to make impartial decisions, free from outside influences and pressures. The statutory and constitutional rights of the people of Utah depend on an independent judiciary. Without it, those rights are threatened.
In Utah, we are fortunate to have a merit selection system for judges, meaning that judges are selected based on their qualifications, not based on their politics. This kind of judicial selection system strengthens the independence of the Utah judiciary by allowing judges’ loyalties to rest exclusively with the law. Utah’s judicial selection process is outlined in the Utah Constitution which states “[s]election of judges shall be based solely upon consideration of fitness for office without regard to any partisan political consideration.” This selection process sets the stage for the people of Utah to have confidence that those appointed to judicial office are qualified and well-situated to be impartial to every litigant.
Utah’s judicial selection system empowers judges to act independently in the performance of their jobs because they are not beholden to anything other than the law. In an independent judiciary, judges make decisions required by the facts and the law without fear of retribution if their decisions are unpopular. That is the essence of judicial independence.
Judicial independence does not mean that the judges are free to make whatever decisions they want. The Utah Legislature is responsible for establishing state statutes, and revising those statutes in response to public policy needs. The Utah judiciary respects and honors that constitutional role of the Legislature. Judges are bound by the laws passed by the Legislature absent a constitutional challenge raised by a party in a specific case. In cases involving a constitutional challenge, judges presume statutes are constitutional. Judges are always bound by the Constitution of the United States and the Utah Constitution.
Recent court cases have attracted a great deal of attention and some commentators have suggested that the judiciary has waded into politics in an effort to assert power and determine public policy outcomes. These views misunderstand and mischaracterize the judiciary’s role in these important public issues. When someone files a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a statute or government action, the judiciary addresses that challenge because it is our obligation to do so. When a judge concludes that the constitution has been violated, the judge must, according to the oath they have taken, uphold the constitution. The decisions in these kinds of cases are not a reflection of the political beliefs of the judges or an attempt to assert power. They are decisions based on constitutional requirements.
Professor Paul Cassell with the University of Utah SJ Quinney College of law stated it well in a recent interview with KUER: “Once a lawsuit has been properly filed, [the courts] need to address the merits. So, I’m not really seeing strong evidence of politicization of our Utah courts right now. The courts in Utah are doing what they’ve always done, which is to decide cases and controversies brought to them.”
Utah’s courts do not control what cases are filed or what arguments are presented by the parties. The courts decide the issues presented to them based on what the law requires.
Judicial independence does not mean that judges are free from accountability. The Utah Constitution creates accountability in multiple ways. It establishes the Judicial Conduct Commission, which investigates judicial misconduct complaints. The Utah Constitution also requires judges to stand for retention elections at specified intervals. To make sure voters have appropriate information for those retention elections, the Legislature established the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission in statute and directed that entity to perform comprehensive performance reviews of judges and to provide the results of those reviews to voters. There are no public officials in Utah subject to more thorough, public and independent performance reviews than judges.
The people of Utah come to the judiciary with important, often life-changing issues. They deserve a judiciary that can protect their rights and adjudicate their cases based on the facts and the law, free from external, unrelated influences. They deserve an independent judiciary. That is what the judges and employees of the Utah judiciary work to provide.
(Ron Gordon) Ron Gordon is the Utah State Court Administrator.
Ron Gordon is the Utah State Court Administrator. Prior to his appointment to that position in 2021, Ron served as General Counsel to Governor Gary Herbert and Governor Spencer Cox.
The Salt Lake Tribune is committed to creating a space where Utahns can share ideas, perspectives and solutions that move our state forward. We rely on your insight to do this. Find out how to share your opinion here, and email us at voices@sltrib.com.
