Welcome to the U, home of one of the nation’s most heated gun battles-not a literal battle, of course.
In an ongoing debate and court deliberations of a lawsuit-the makings of which have spanned nearly two years-Utah State Attorney General Mark Shurtleff maintains his opinion that concealed weapons should be allowed on the U campus.
Just don’t let the administration catch you with one.
Like the other 10 institutions of higher education in the state of Utah, the U has a no-gun policy.
The policy, despite its critics, is currently in effect, and will remain so until further judgment in the courts, said U Vice President for University Relations Fred Esplin.
The legality of the U’s policy was up for question in the mid 90s, when the Utah State Legislature passed a bill allowing itself to regulate concealed weapons policies.
However, almost two years ago, Utah State Gov. Michael Leavitt issued an executive order against concealed weapons on campuses.
That was followed by Shurtleff’s formal opinion, stating policies like the U’s were constitutionally against the law in Utah.
Gov. Leavitt rescinded his executive order due to Shurtleff’s opinion, Esplin said.
In an attempt to explore whether schools and churches, for example, were limited by the same bounds as other state buildings, the legislative Administrative Rules Committee appealed all campus gun-control policies after listening to arguments from both sides early last year.
The March 2002 Legislative Session ended with a bill that repealed those policies.
As a result, the U filed a “friendly lawsuit,” in which administrators “took a different interpretation of the law,” Esplin said.
The U filed the suit in federal courts for two main reasons.
First, administrators reasoned that the Constitution and laws in Utah give U officials the authority to create these kinds of policies.
Second, even if the state regulations don’t allow for it, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects academic freedom, which is put at risk if there are guns in the classroom, Esplin said.
Shurtleff, however, says the U’s strain to protect First Amendment rights is strange in that the policy ignores Second Amendment issues-like the right to bear arms.
Furthermore, he says there is no evidence that concealed weapons on campus would infringe upon academic freedom.
Regardless of the differing opinions, in late March, U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball sent the case from the federal level to Utah for a decision to be made on a state level. He decided that, “The U’s claims under the state’s constitution and statutes regarding our concealed weapons policy should be decided in a state court before he’ll rule on a federal level,” according to Coralie Alder, university spokeswoman.
In May, the U decided to continue the battle by filing suit in Utah-where Shurtleff says the decision should take place.
Both parties are currently waiting for a date to be set for hearings. Regardless of who wins, it is open to appeal on the state level.
If the U wins on the state level and on any appeals made, the issue would be all but dead, and the U’s policy deemed as constitutional, Esplin said.
However, if the U loses the decision, besides appealing on a state level, there is the option of going back to the federal courts for a ruling on the First Amendment issue.