fbpx
Why Utah’s constitution contains ‘every imaginable protection’ for religious freedom

Written by William C. Duncan

July 23, 2020

The search for religious freedom is woven deeply into Utah’s history. More so than almost any other state (except perhaps some of the original colonial territories).

Utah’s unique history

In his 2018 keynote speech at the Religious Freedom Annual Review, Elder L. Whitney Clayton, a leader of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, described the pioneering settlers of Utah in the 19th Century:

… faith brought them to the fateful decision to abandon their Illinois homes, their temple, and the country they loved and make the 1,300-mile trek west to a barren wilderness that they were determined to make their Zion—their place of gathering, worship, freedom, and peace.

Added to this reality is the rocky relationship the territory of Utah had with the federal government prior to statehood. The national government was concerned with the practice of polygamy, Church control of politics and Church influence on schools. Concerned is an understatement, of course, given the history of an actual invasion and aggressive criminal prosecutions over four decades.

These pioneer experiences contributed to Utah’s constitutional provisions to protect religious freedom.

Religious freedom in the Utah Constitution

Utah’s Constitution is undistinguished overall. It borrowed heavily from other states (unsurprising given it was the seventh draft to be sent to Congress and borrowing from other states would likely increase its chances of being accepted).

However, there is an important exception. As one academic noted, “Almost every imaginable protection for religious freedom and injunction against the union of church and state has been included” in the Utah state constitution.

Relevant protections are included below. Since the drafting was done in committees and we do not have a record of those proceedings, we can only make informed assumptions as to why precise words or phrases were chosen based on the language and the unique history of the state.

All men have the inherent and inalienable right . . . to worship according to the dictates of their consciences. (Article I, Section 1)

Though we don’t precisely know why this language was chosen, it is notable in that it echoes the 11th Article of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The rights of conscience shall never be infringed. The State shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust or for any vote at any election; nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief or the absence thereof. There shall be no union of Church and State, nor shall any church dominate the State or interfere with its functions. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment. (Article I, Section 4)

This language copies the U.S. Constitution’s two religious freedom provisions—the First Amendment and Article VI—but adds a protection of conscience, extending protection beyond strictly religious motives and evoking the criticism of the federal government’s polygamy prosecutions which resulted in people being jailed for “conscience’ sake.”

The additional language of this section reflects a number of specific Utah concerns. For example, President James Garfield had proposed barring those who believe in polygamy from jury service.

In addition, the “union of church and state” and church domination language was surely intended to allay concerns that the numerically predominant church would simply take over.

Perfect toleration of religious sentiment is guaranteed. No inhabitant of this State shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship; but polygamous or plural marriages are forever prohibited. (Article III, paragraph 1)

This language is taken from the Utah Enabling Act passed by Congress to set out the terms by which Utah could be added as a state.

No religious or partisan test or qualification shall be required of any person, as a condition of admission, as teacher or student, into any public educational institution of the State. (Article X, section 12, which is now section 8; some wording changes were made since 1896.)

Like Article I, section 4, this language would make clear to Congress, and ensure for the future, that Utah would not show favoritism to a particular religion.

Neither the Legislature nor any county, city, town, school district or other public corporation, shall make any appropriation to aid in the support of any school, seminary, academy, college, university or other institution, controlled in whole, or in part, by any church, sect or denomination whatever. (Article X, section 13, which is now section 9; some wording changes were made since 1896.)

Somewhat ironically, this language was actually common in other state constitutions at the time because of a concern that Catholic schools might compete with the public schools which were de facto Protestant in character. Presumably, though, it would address worries that a predominantly Latter-day Saint legislature would vote appropriations or funding to mainly church schools.

Provided further, That the property . . . lots with the buildings thereon used exclusively for either religious worship or charitable purposes. . ., shall be exempt from taxation. (Article XIII, section 3; some language has been updated since 1896.)

The tax exemption language may have hearkened to the specific experience of Utah where the federal government had seized church property as part of its anti-polygamy campaign.

Conclusion

In his speech, Elder Clayton noted “for tens of millions of Americans faith and religious conviction are the most powerful and defining sources of personal and family identity in their lives.” The Framers of the Utah Constitution protected that source of identity well and set an example that could profitably be followed throughout the United States and the world.

More Insights
What you need to know about election integrity

What you need to know about election integrity

It should be easy to vote and hard to cheat. This oft-quoted phrase has been articulated as a guiding principle by many elected officials wading into voting and election policy debates in recent years. So why has this issue been so contentious, and what’s the solution?

read more

Connect with Sutherland Institute

Join Our Donor Network