Paige Petersen
Non-Partisan | Utah
Candidate Profile
Leans Originalist
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Paige Petersen
Party
Non-Partisan
Election Year
2022
Election
General
Race
Supreme Court (retention)
Incumbent
Yes
Links
EDUCATION
Candidate did not provide
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
Race
OTHER INFORMATION
Governor Gary Herbert nominated Justice Petersen to the Utah Supreme Court in 2017.
Justice Petersen said “I am deeply grateful to Gov. Herbert for the confidence he has placed in me. If confirmed, I will work hard, and interpret the laws of Utah with fidelity.”
During an interview with Attorney at Law Magazine, about her time as a district court judge, Justice Peterson said, "I want the lawyers and parties in my courtroom to leave feeling that I treated them fairly, whether they prevailed or not. I do my best to be prepared, patient and impartial. I listen closely and ask questions until I understand both sides."
Notable Cases:
- Vega v. Jordan Valley Medical Center, LP (2019): Justice Petersen joined the majority opinion, holding that a portion of the Utah Health Care Malpractice Act was unconstitutional because it granted judicial authority to the Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing in violation of the Utah Constitution (2).
- Grant v. Herbert (2019): Justice Petersen wrote the majority opinion, holding that the governor's move to call a special legislative session was not equivalent to vetoing a ballot initiative and that all laws passed by 2/3rds majorities were immune from ballot initiatives, even if that was their original source.
- Mitchell v. Roberts (2020): Justice Petersen signed the majority opinion, holding that the historical understanding of vested rights in due process prevented the state legislature from reviving time-barred sexual abuse claims (2-3).
- Justice Petersen signed the 2019 Rule change, which extended state bar eligibility to DACA recipients receiving deferred action status and who are eligible to work in the US. The court ruled that it was able to do this because its rule qualified as a "state law" under 8 U.S.C. section 1621(d) and it had the sole authority to regulate the practice of law.
- Count My Vote v. Cox (2019): Justice Petersen wrote a dissent in which she argued that the state's requirement that an ballot initiative's sponsor submit its final signatures a month ahead of the deadline for signees to withdraw their signatures from the initiative placed an "undue burden" on Utah voters' right to initiate legislation in line with the precedent of Utah Safe to Learn-Safe to Worship Coal., Inc v. State (2004) (31). She said the Extra Month Provision made the threshold for an initiative to be placed on the ballot unclear because an opposing organization could bring the initiative under the legislative requirements relatively easily by targeting key signees, and the initiative's sponsor would have no means to address the challenge by adding more signatures. Justice Peterson concluded that the Extra Month Provision's separate deadlines for initiative sponsors and signees withdrawing their support "permit the process to become unfair and as a result, inaccurate" (38), and that the law's separate deadlines are "not necessary to promote the basic purpose of allowing signers to remove their signatures" (40).
Judge Voter Guide gave her 3 stars and voted to "replace."
QUESTIONNAIRE
VALUES
I agree with Critical Race Theory (CRT) which asserts that the institutions in the United States are fundamentally racist.
Did not answer
I agree with Critical Race Theory (CRT) which asserts that the institutions in the United States are fundamentally racist.
Did not answer
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality that is necessary for our system of limited government.
Did not answer
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality that is necessary for our system of limited government.
Did not answer
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What types of pro bono work have you done?
Did not answer
What types of pro bono work have you done?
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony or been penalized in either civil or criminal court for sexual misconduct? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Have you ever been convicted of a felony or been penalized in either civil or criminal court for sexual misconduct? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
What education or experience qualifies you to hold the office for which you seek election?
Did not answer
What education or experience qualifies you to hold the office for which you seek election?
Did not answer
Why should the voters choose you?
Did not answer
Why should the voters choose you?
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Justices should not interpret the federal and state constitutions as living documents, but should use a textualist and originalist approach to interpretation.
Did not answer
Justices should not interpret the federal and state constitutions as living documents, but should use a textualist and originalist approach to interpretation.
Did not answer
What is the proper use of legislative history in interpreting statutory law?
Did not answer
What is the proper use of legislative history in interpreting statutory law?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
How should a court address the balance between public health and individual freedoms in the time of a pandemic?
Did not answer
How should a court address the balance between public health and individual freedoms in the time of a pandemic?
Did not answer
In light of the case Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a prohibition on sexual-orientation discrimination, which justice’s opinion most closely aligns with your own opinion?
Did not answer
In light of the case Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a prohibition on sexual-orientation discrimination, which justice’s opinion most closely aligns with your own opinion?
Did not answer
What role (if any) does a judge have in maintaining the separation of church and state?
Did not answer
What role (if any) does a judge have in maintaining the separation of church and state?
Did not answer
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
Did not answer
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
Did not answer
When should a judge overturn past court decisions?
Did not answer
When should a judge overturn past court decisions?
Did not answer
How should a judge determine which rights are protected by the Constitution even though they are not specifically mentioned?
Did not answer
How should a judge determine which rights are protected by the Constitution even though they are not specifically mentioned?
Did not answer
What legal principles should a court consider when evaluating parents’ objection to their child obtaining medical procedures or drugs designed to affirm the child’s desired gender?
Did not answer
What legal principles should a court consider when evaluating parents’ objection to their child obtaining medical procedures or drugs designed to affirm the child’s desired gender?
Did not answer
What principles should guide a court’s analysis of whether your state’s constitution gives terminally ill patients a right to assisted suicide?
Did not answer
What principles should guide a court’s analysis of whether your state’s constitution gives terminally ill patients a right to assisted suicide?
Did not answer
Would you describe your judicial philosophy as originalist, living constitutionalist, or something else?
Did not answer
Would you describe your judicial philosophy as originalist, living constitutionalist, or something else?
Did not answer
