Judges in the state's 6th Judicial District will not go along with a new law requiring gun lockers in courthouses because they say it violates the separation of powers in government — and in most cases would compromise security.
The 26-page document was signed by Presiding District Judge K.L. McIff, District Judge David Mower and Juvenile Court Judge Paul Lyman. All three were unavailable for comment by press time today.
The 6th District encompasses Garfield, Kane, Piute, Sanpete, Sevier and Wayne counties.
The document has been sent to various legislators, all presiding judges in the state, the Administrative Office of the Courts and Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Christine M. Durham.
The law was supposed to go into effect Monday, but funding for the lockers will not be available until July 1.
Meanwhile, Rep. John Swallow, R-Sandy, who sponsored the law, said any decisions regarding these judges' actions now rest with the Utah Attorney General's Office and perhaps ultimately will be decided in court.
"After careful consideration and analysis, it is the collective view of the judges in the 6th District that we should maintain the weapon-free status now in force in all courthouses within the district," the judges said.
In Sevier County, gun lockers have been installed in the relatively new courthouse but will be removed. The other counties have older buildings with no perimeter security.
"In the other five counties, an effort to install gun lockers would not only be an exercise in futility, it would be counterproductive to existing security," the document says. "It is not feasible to install lockers at each of the multiple unmanned, unsecure entrances which range from four to six in the various courthouses.
"If lockers were installed at one location, they would be an open invitation to weapon holders to gain access from all the other locations through the very corridors that would bring them in contact with all participants in the judicial process. The net effect would be to create the very problem we are trying hard to avoid," the document says.
The judges argue in the document that the courts are one part of three separate branches of government — the legislative, judicial and executive — and that the Legislature cannot compel court facilities to be open to people carrying weapons.
What's more, the presence of guns in the courthouse violates its primary function, the judges argue.
"No single characteristic of the judiciary is more defining of its nature nor of greater consequence to its purpose than its reliance on the power of reason and law rather than the power of the sword," the document states.
"The right of the judiciary to maintain an arms-free environment not only relates to the protection of judge, jury, court personnel, counsel, litigants and witnesses but to the maintenance of an environment where even the silent influence of physical weaponry is eliminated," the document says.
Swallow, who said the Legislature passed the law overwhelmingly, said it simply extends a safety protection for people coming to courthouses who are exercising their constitutional right to bear arms. He said it's more dangerous for people to leave guns in cars, stick them behind bushes or "do some other crazy thing" to avoid taking a lawfully carried weapon into a courthouse.
Swallow said he has confidence in Utah's legal system, with the attorney general deciding whether the judges are breaking the law or not, and the court system available to further explore the topic if necessary.
"I think they (these judges) are wrong, but I respect the process," Swallow said. "Our system allows for people to challenge laws they believe are unconstitutional, and although I may disagree, I certainly would never stand in way of someone's constitutional rights to challenge a law."
E-MAIL: lindat@desnews.com