Shurtleff promises to defend Amendment 3

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff tried once again Wednesday to convince lawmakers that he'd do a good job defending the recently passed anti-gay marriage amendment, even though he opposed it.

About all Shurtleff left the closed-door meeting with, however, was in effect an agreement by Republican members of the Senate to postpone a decision on hiring outside legal counsel to defend the state in the event of a lawsuit over Amendment 3.

"We decided there isn't anything to decide at this point," newly elected Senate President John Valentine, R-Orem, said. Lawmakers likely won't take a stand on the issue unless the amendment is challenged, he said.

That may or may not happen anytime soon. Opponents of the amendment have said they plan on taking a wait-and-see approach about going to court, evaluating what action is taken against similar amendments in other states.

Shurtleff, a Republican who opposes gay marriage, got into trouble with lawmakers this summer when he took a public stand against the constitutional amendment, saying it was a bad law that should be rejected because it forbids granting "the same or substantially legal effect" as marriage to other relationships.

The attorney general was called on the carpet by the Republican senators before the election. Valentine said he asked Shurtleff to return Wednesday, to give him a chance to explain why his office should defend the amendment.

"There is concern by members of the caucus . . . in light of the public position he took," Valentine said. "I would say people are passionate on the issue — elected representatives and the elected attorney general are equally passionate."

Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, said nothing he heard from Shurtleff changed his mind about the need for outside legal counsel. "I think there are very strong opinions on both sides," Buttars said. "Everything got out today."

Sen. Mike Waddoups, R-West Jordan, agreed. "There were feelings that needed to be aired on both sides," said Waddoups, the outgoing majority leader. "It was a little emotional for both."

Shurtleff had no comment about the meeting, his spokesman, Paul Murphy, said. He said attorney-client privilege prevented Shurtleff from talking about what was discussed with lawmakers about any potential legal action.

State law makes it clear that the attorney general has the final say on who would represent the state if the amendment is challenged. The office has the responsibility to "prosecute or defend all causes in which the state or a state agency is a party," the law states.

Of course, political reality is different. The Legislature controls the attorney general's budget and has wrangled with past administrations over just this issue. Valentine said Shurtleff's budget was not discussed Wednesday.

"We will listen and try to follow their advice," Murphy said of the lawmakers who are raising concerns. "But ultimately, when it comes to legal practice, it's up to the attorney general."