The Utah House on Monday voted against funding a multimillion-dollar fight against Roe v. Wade, reverting instead to a ban on abortions that would take effect if another state's legal challenge of the landmark ruling is successful.

HB235, sponsored by Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, originally began as a "trigger bill" but was substituted in committee with an outright abortion ban, setting the stage for a costly state-led legal battle.

Representatives voted nearly two-to-one to return HB235 to the less-aggressive trigger, citing concerns about timing and the cost to fight what is believed to be an uphill battle.

"This isn't a decision about how we feel about abortion — this is a decision about what is in the best interests of this state and what is likely to be successful," said Rep. Kay McIff, R-Richfield.

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has indicated a desire for unanimity on the court, and any decision overturning Roe would be extremely divided, said McIff, a retired judge. "It's important for us not only to choose the fight but to choose the timing in the fight."

The Supreme Court's 1973 decision recognizing a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion has been challenged many times, including once by Utah in 1991. That case cost the state more than $1 million, money that many lawmakers said Monday should not be spent again.

"I strongly oppose abortion, as do most people in this body. But I do think that a trigger best serves the needs of the people of this state," said Rep. Stephen Urquhart, R-St. George, who offered the substitute bill taking HB235 back to a trigger mechanism.

The Utah Attorney General's Office estimates it would cost $1.3 million — nearly $440,000 per year for three years — to litigate an outright ban on abortion. The office also warned that a one-time payment of up to $2 million may be necessary for plaintiffs' attorney fees, depending on the outcome of the litigation.

In a recent Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV poll, a majority — 52 percent — opposed spending state money to defend a state ban on abortion.

At least four other states are considering legislation that would force a Roe v. Wade challenge. Urquhart said Utah should support, but not bankroll, those efforts.

"I think that it's their turn," he said. "They can fund that."

The over 30-minute debate centered more on the decision to spend money defending a lawsuit and not the issue of abortion itself.

Rep. Ron Bigelow, R-West Valley, agreed that the Utah Legislature should wait until the time is right to fight Roe v. Wade.

"I want to win this battle," he said. "I don't want to play games with it. I don't want to pretend that we're doing something. I don't want to throw money away to try to achieve an objective."