What standard applies when challenging ballot titles in Utah? Stavros v. Office of Legislative Research Explained

In Stavros v. Office of Legislative Research, the Utah Supreme Court established important precedent regarding the standard for reviewing challenged ballot titles under Utah Code section 20A-7-209.

Background and facts: Two groups of petitioners challenged ballot titles prepared by the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel (LRGC) for separate initiatives. Initiative A addressed English as Utah’s official language, while Initiative B concerned property forfeiture protections. Both groups argued their respective ballot titles failed to provide true and impartial statements of the measures’ purposes.

Key legal issues: The central question was what standard courts should apply when reviewing challenged ballot titles. LRGC argued the review should focus on whether the agency acted “to the best of its ability” and without “intentionally” creating prejudicial language, essentially requiring petitioners to prove bad faith.

Court’s analysis and holding: The court rejected LRGC’s proposed standard, noting it would create an impossible burden for challengers given the compressed timeframe for appeals. Instead, the court established an objective evaluation standard focused on whether the ballot title provides a “true and impartial statement of the purpose of the measure.” The court emphasized that subsections requiring “best efforts” and avoiding “intentional” bias are instructions to LRGC, not separate requirements for judicial review.

Practice implications: This decision provides clarity for practitioners challenging ballot titles. Rather than attempting to prove the drafting agency’s inadequate efforts or bad faith—which would be nearly impossible within the statutory timeframe—attorneys should focus on demonstrating objective deficiencies in the title’s accuracy or neutrality. The court will examine whether the title faithfully represents the initiative’s actual purpose as expressed in its text, not the agency’s subjective intent or effort level.