U. gun ban back in court

The battle over guns on the University of Utah campus has returned to the courtroom.

The Utah Attorney General's Office on Thursday filed a notice of appeal in the case, which was dismissed in late August following a state court judge's ruling that state law does not prohibit the U. from enforcing its own ban on on-campus firearms.

"I believe that the decision was wrong, and I think I have a duty to appeal it to a higher court," Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said.

In ruling in favor of the university, 3rd District Judge Robert Hilder determined that the U.'s 25-year-old internal policy prohibiting firearms on campus does not run contrary to the state's concealed weapons law and firearms act. Those statutes, according to Shurtleff, grant the Utah Legislature sole authority to enact gun laws.

The appeal to the Utah Supreme Court will focus on a narrow issue arising out of Hilder's ruling — the judge's finding that the U.'s policy does not invalidate concealed-weapons permits, it just does not allow the weapons themselves to be carried on campus.

State law holds that concealed-weapons permits are valid everywhere in the state, other than those locations that lawmakers have designated as secure areas, such as courthouses and airports.

Shurtleff said lawmakers clearly intended the law to apply to permits as well as weapons, and he will ask the high court to make that finding.

"The Supreme Court will simply have to look at the statute and the intent of the legislature when it was passed," he said.

The high court will likely not hear arguments in the matter until after next year's legislative session, when lawmakers are expected to address the issue through additional legislation. Sen. Michael Waddoups, R-West Jordan, has said he will carry a bill clarifying lawmakers' authority and intent in regulating when and where concealed weapons may be carried.

If that is the case, Shurtleff said, he will dismiss the appeal.

Last week, in an unusual move, Hilder recused himself from additional participation in the case. Although no matters are currently pending before him, the judge said his impartiality has been called into question since his Aug. 29 ruling.

Hilder cited "widely publicized statements" by Shurtleff and Waddoups that the judge took to indicate he has predisposed notions about gun control.

"Mr. Shurtleff did say he could not predict how a judge would rule, but that this court and one other have 'tipped their hats on how they feel about guns,' " Hilder wrote. "The foregoing are clear statements of bias that, if true, would disqualify the assigned judge from the case."

Calling Hilder's action "curious," Shurtleff said he doesn't believe Hilder is biased. If so, he said, he would bring a motion asking the judge to step down if the case ever returned to Hilder's courtroom.

Shurtleff said the statements came as his office was evaluating its options for an appeal and never meant to imply Hilder was unfair in his ruling.

---

E-mail: awelling@desnews.com