Latest news with #BradyBrammer
Yahoo
05-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
What makes fentanyl more dangerous than other drugs?
Fentanyl is about 100 times more potent than morphine, and carfentanil — an opioid used to tranquilize elephants — is 1,000 times more potent. A fatal dose of fentanyl can be fatal with a dose as little as 2 milligrams. Likewise, as little as .02 milligrams of carfentanil can end a life. Both are being trafficked for use in the state of Utah. Last month, a 14-month-old toddler overdosed on fentanyl in Neola, Duchesne County, per ABC4. If signed into law, HB87 would designate fentanyl distribution as the first drug to be classified as a first-degree offense when a person is caught trafficking 100 mg or more of fentanyl or a fentanyl-like substance. 'This has become more than just a drug possession issue. This has become, in many ways, a murder weapon in our state,' the bill's floor sponsor, Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, said Tuesday evening during Senate floor time. 'For that reason, we do need to have it be specific as to fentanyl versus other substances.' The bill passed its second and third readings and was unanimously approved with a vote of 26-0. The general rules were also suspended to expedite the bill's process further. After the Senate president's signature, it will be sent to the House speaker for approval before making its way to the governor's desk for review. Last year, Utah set its record for fentanyl pill seizures, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. By July, nearly 800,000 pills were confiscated, setting the end of the year up to reach at or above 1 million. Fentanyl also accounted for nearly 50% of all drug overdoses in the state in 2023, per the Utah Department of Health and Human Services, making it the most common drug overdose. 'We have to do something with this particular narcotic,' the bill's sponsor, Rep. Matthew Gwynn, R-Farr West, previously said. 'Fentanyl is the worst of the worst, and so we're going to create a policy that says if you're trafficking the worst of the worst, then you're the worst of the worst. You need to be in prison.'
Yahoo
27-02-2025
- General
- Yahoo
A UVU nature and research center for Utah Lake may get legislative lift
A legislative measure which gives a nod to a new nature and research center affiliated with Utah Valley University and focused on all things Utah Lake passed the House Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment committee earlier this week. SB319 by Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, deals with funding for the center, which the Utah Lake Authority wants to see become a reality so residents and visitors can better understand the value of the lake. Luke Peterson, executive director of the Utah Lake Authority, testified last fall before a committee of lawmakers that the lake has been shedding its negative reputation. He emphasized that attitudes are changing over time, especially if a resident overcomes their previous discriminatory attitudes and visits the lake to see the decades of work that has been done to restore it to its best possible state. At the time, he emphasized the lake's interconnectivity to the Great Salt Lake. 'Obviously, we see that people are concerned about Great Salt Lake and we all are and appreciate that. What's behind this data that I think is interesting is how many people we discovered do not realize that Utah Lake provides water to Great Salt Lake. And I find this over and over again, it really startles me,' Peterson said. 'So, helping people to understand that the fate of the two lakes is tied — so if Utah Lake dies, Great Salt Lake dies — is really critical for us as well. So that gave us some information there.' Utah Lake was once a repository for raw sewage. Nonnative carp were introduced to the lake and they are an invasive species that outcompetes other fish for food. Common carp can grow to 47 inches long and are also believed to reduce water quality. The population of native June sucker has been decimated over the last century or more, a consequence of predation. The June sucker was reduced to a mere 300 fish, and it landed on the federal government's list of endangered species — and while it came with a slew of restrictions, it also came with money to bolster its recovery. Six years, federal officials downgraded the June sucker from endangered to threatened, a huge victory and recognition of the work that has gone into its recovery — with a population that stands at 30,000 fish. 'The recovery of the June sucker, the reduction in the carp and phragmites — those are really good indicators that we're turning the corner on that, that effort that's been going on for 50 years now,' Peterson told the Deseret News. Phragmites have been reduced by 70% — another hard, thankless task. Phragmites are an invasive reed that sucks water like it has been desert deprived for weeks and then takes over native vegetation. A crowning achievement for Utah Lake supporters would be the construction of a nature center next to the Lindon harbor. As a representative in Congress, then Rep. John Curtis, R-Utah, secured $5 million in funding for the center. Brammer's bill takes a pool of already allocated funds from the Department of Natural Resources and transfers that $2.1 million to Utah Valley University because the nature and research center will be a campus asset. Proponents were hoping for $15 million in one-time funding from the state Legislature to get the project underway by this fall, but in a year where revenues are tight, that didn't happen. 'Obviously, we'll have to come back next session, and we're also working on fundraising and so forth for the next year,' Peterson said. 'But with that money, plus the money that we got from then Congressman Curtis, we definitely have the money to get plans developed and see how far we can we can get it a long,' Peterson said.
Yahoo
27-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Feeling lonely? Utah's working on a plan for that
The United States is experiencing a loneliness epidemic, and though Utah is widely-regarded as one of the nation's happiest states, data from the Utah Department of Health and Human Services indicates that feelings of social isolation in Utah have rocketed in recent years. Last year, Axios indicated that at least 42.5% of Utahns report feeling lonely at least sometimes — compared to the national average of about 40.3%. A new resolution from Sen. Brady Brammer at the Utah State Legislature would recognize loneliness as a critical public health priority and, to that end, establish the Utah Community Health Day on the last Saturday of April. Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, called his resolution a 'friendly, happy' bill that addresses a growing epidemic of loneliness and social isolation in Utah. The COVID-19 pandemic had a noticeable effect on social interactions, disrupting businesses, governments, religious services and social functions. Though it has abated, it drew attention to the the loneliness epidemic, which started years prior. 'We are seeing dramatic declines in the amount of time people are spending together,' said Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia and a senior fellow of the Institute for Family Studies. Wilcox is also a contributor to the Deseret News. Loneliness is increasingly coming for young adults. Harvard researchers found that 61% of young adults report loneliness 'frequently or all the time,' compared to 24% of adults aged 55-65. On the other end of the spectrum, loneliness has long haunted the elderly, who more often than young people have suffered the loss of spouses and friends while also sending their children off to start their own lives. Wilcox cited increasing technology use, including social media and the comparisons that can result from spending time on it, as a possible cause for increasing loneliness. '(Regardless of the cause), Americans who are living more isolated lives are actually more likely to be vulnerable to things like heart attacks and suicide and drug overdoses, et cetera,' he said. 'So, you know, we are, as Aristotle said, social animals ... we are more likely to flourish when we spend time with friends and family members and even strangers.' Loneliness can be deadly, according to research done at Brigham Young University. It can worsen inflammation, cognitive decline, depression and immune system decline. It can even usher in dementia in the elderly. In 2023, the United States Surgeon General formally identified loneliness and social isolation as an urgent public health issue. 'Social connection is as fundamental to our mental and physical health as food, water and sleep,' stated the Surgeon General at the time, Dr. Vivek Murthy, who completed his second term as U.S. Surgeon General in January 2025. 'In other words, social connection is critical to our human experience. We are literally hard-wired to connect to others,' he said. The resolution introduced in Utah, SCR4, 'urges individuals to prioritize building positive relationships and fostering social connection.' To that end, it establishes Utah Community Health Day, a day 'dedicated to fostering social connection, reducing loneliness and social isolation and promoting overall well-being through community events, volunteer opportunities and neighborhood gatherings.' 'This encourages people to get out into the community, love one another, celebrate one another and communicate with one another,' Brammer told the Utah State Senate. Wilcox supported the work already done by members of the Utah State Legislature, including Community Health Day, saying that strengthening family and civil society was the best approach. He said that Americans most resilient to loneliness tend to be ones who attend church and live with family members. 'When it comes to addressing the challenge of isolation and loneliness ... it's a challenge in terms of strengthening family and civil society,' he said. He also endorsed the Utah State Legislature's work to reduce cellphone usage in schools, including SB178, which bans phones and smart watches from public school classrooms across the state.
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘Power grab' from the courts? Utah bill would raise bar to pause alleged unconstitutional laws
Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, works in the Senate chamber at the Capitol in Salt Lake City on Thursday, Feb. 6, 2025. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) A wonky bill that could have big impacts on court cases challenging the constitutionality of laws passed by the Legislature is heading to the full Utah Senate for consideration after winning endorsement from a Senate committee on Wednesday. The bill's critics — including those challenging Utah's near-total abortion ban in court — argue it's part of a 'blatant power grab by the Legislature against the courts and the constitutional separation of powers in Utah.' Contending that Utah judges have too often blocked laws passed by the Legislature from taking effect while courts weigh their legal standing, Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, wants to raise the legal bar before laws can be put on hold. With SB204, Brammer wants to give state attorneys the ability to seek a 'suspensive appeal' to stop a court-ordered injunction from blocking enforcement of a law while the rest of the court case plays out. 'What that does is it says, 'Hey, you know, the law should not be set aside quite so easily,'' Brammer said Wednesday during the bill's first public hearing in the Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'If they're going to enjoin a law that's been passed by the duly elected people, they are getting in the way of democracy on a lot of levels,' Brammer said. 'You know, there are times when that's appropriate, but they may have swung the pendulum too far. And so that's really the brunt of this. And this provides immediate relief to get that issue before the courts sooner rather than later.' If a trial court grants an injunctive order in a case with an underlying claim that the state law is unconstitutional, SB204 would allow state attorneys to file a motion to ask the court to decide whether the plaintiff challenging the law can 'establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that there is a substantial likelihood that the plaintiff will prevail on the merits of the underlying claim that the state law is unconstitutional.' The bill would then require the judge to issue a decision that 'resolves any doubts in favor of constitutionality' and 'states the facts, law, and reasoning that support the court's finding.' If a judge still issues an injunction, SB204 would then allow state attorneys to seek a 'suspensive appeal' to take the case straight to the state's highest court. The Utah Supreme Court would then weigh whether the law is unconstitutional and whether the injunction 'should remain in effect during the pendency of the civil action.' While the Utah Supreme Court weighs those questions, however, the injunction would be 'suspended until the appeal is resolved or the parties stipulate otherwise.' If passed by the full Utah Legislature, SB204 would take effect on May 7. Brammer argued courts should have a higher bar before pushing pause. 'Because we can't just run out the clock at the beginning without some really good reasons while the law does not go into effect,' he said. Brammer pointed to a ruling in December in which a judge granted a temporary restraining order against a recently-passed law to restrict flavored e-cigarettes. That bill, which he co-sponsored with Democratic Sen. Jen Plumb, was blocked 'without even receiving the opposing brief from the state,' he said. 'That's taking our law quite lightly,' Brammer said. 'We do have some concern with the levity with which the courts appear to be restraining laws at the outset of cases so that they're not in effect until it gets to the Supreme Court.' Though he didn't point to them specifically, there are other more high-profile court cases that have fed tension between the Republican-controlled Utah Legislature and the Utah Supreme Court. One lawsuit in play that Brammer's bill could potentially impact is an ongoing court case challenging Utah's near-total abortion ban that was triggered when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Last summer, the Utah Supreme Court upheld an injunction that blocked enforcement of Utah's trigger abortion ban after Planned Parenthood of Utah sued, alleging the ban was unconstitutional. That injunction remains in place today as litigation continues to play out in 3rd District Court. In the meantime, abortions have remained legal in Utah up to 18 weeks of most pregnancies under a 2019 law. That Utah Supreme Court ruling upset Republican lawmakers, and in part has fueled lawmakers' frustration with the judiciary that continues to loom over the 2025 Utah Legislature. Citing 'frustrations' with the courts, Utah Republican lawmakers eye possible judicial reforms Brammer's bill is one of the first to be considered so far this session that could potentially give the Legislature more of an edge in court proceedings. He has another, SB203, that would restrict who would be eligible for third-party standing to bring civil actions against the state. That bill was held up in the Senate committee Wednesday after it failed to advance on a 3-3 vote. But the committee's chair Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said he'd put it on the committee's next agenda to reconsider it. To Kathryn Boyd, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Association of Utah, both of those bills raise a bigger issue than just the potential impact to the case holding up Utah's abortion ban. 'The real impact of these bills is on the rule of law and the judiciary because they represent a blatant power grab by the Legislature against the courts and the constitutional separation of powers in Utah,' Boyd said in a statement. 'Sen. Brammer is proposing an untested and fringe legal theory to wrest power away from the Courts because he is offended when Utah judges follow long-established rules and procedures to block unconstitutional legislation passed by lawmakers.' Brammer, through a statement issued by a Senate spokesperson earlier this week, did not answer a question from Utah News Dispatch about whether his bill is at least in part aimed at trying to enact Utah's abortion ban while the court case plays out. His statement explained the bill from a broader level. 'In this state and in our courts, it has long been the policy to presume laws are constitutional, with doubts resolved in favor of constitutionality,' he said. 'SB204 seeks to ensure that legal tools are used in a way that respects the roles of all three branches of government while also addressing concerns about the overuse of injunctions by courts to block laws passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor. I believe this will help protect the integrity of the process of upholding the rule of law in Utah.' David Connors, a former district court judge who spoke on behalf of the Utah State Bar Commission before the Senate committee, said the bar has voted to oppose the bill in its current form, though he said the commission welcomes further discussion to address concerns. Currently, though, Connors said Brammer's bill 'raises some interesting and serious issues regarding the checks and balances within our constitutional form of government.' Utah Supreme Court upholds pause on trigger law that would ban almost all abortions Connors noted that under Utah's existing rules of civil procedure, before issuing an injunction on a law, a judge already needs to determine 'there is a substantial likelihood that the applicant would prevail on the merits of the underlying claim.' He noted that the Legislature changed that standard roughly a year ago to raise that bar. 'And that's important,' he said. 'Because what's being asked to be done in this case is, one assumes the judge has already made that particular determination. If the party opposing doesn't like the determination, it can then go back and make a motion and ask the same judge to make an additional ruling the same issue … and then asking the court not only to find that it's likely to be unconstitutional, but also to find that likelihood by a standard we call clear and convincing evidence, which is a heightened standard.' That's an 'odd' standard to require at that point in the case, Connors said, because at that point the case would not have yet reached evidentiary proceedings. 'Clear and convincing evidence is a question that the court has to determine when it weighs evidence at the conclusion of a case,' Connors said, not at the beginning. On top of that is the question of allowing a 'suspensive appeal' to bring the case directly to the Utah Supreme Court. Connors said then the bill appears to 'take away from the Supreme Court any option to allow the injunction to stay in place.' Connors then questioned whether the law could apply to not just the Legislature or the state government, but 'any city' that could try to invoke the SB204's provisions. He warned against 'unintended consequences' of potentially empowering other legislative bodies, like cities, to enact clearly unconstitutional laws — such as a law to seize and destroy gun owners' guns. Linda Smith, an attorney and retired law professor, also spoke against the bill, saying it would 'vastly change how courts deal with injunctions.' She argued the courts must already weigh high standards before issuing an injunction on a law, including whether a person seeking the pause will suffer 'irreparable harm' without the injunction, and that the 'threatened injury to the applicant outweighs whatever damage the proposed order or injunction may cause the party restrained or enjoined,' and that the injunction 'would not be adverse to the public interest.' 'Those other points robustly cover whether this injunction is appropriate in the setting where there's a question about a law's constitutionality, and the judge thinks it's likely unconstitutional,' Smith said. CONTACT US She argued Brammer's bill goes too far. 'I think that's very poor public policy, to require that a statute that a judge has found likely unconstitutional to go into effect just because there's an appeal,' Smith said. Brammer disagreed with Smith and Connors. He argued his bill would only apply to state law and not cities, though he agreed the Legislature should be wary of 'unintended consequences.' 'That's been one of the problems with the courts kind of being very loose on enjoining laws,' Brammer said, adding that he believes judges have been 'getting the analysis wrong' and that's led to them frequently issuing injunctions. 'We are very concerned with the levity by which the courts are treating the laws in the Legislature. And they're setting themselves up to be antagonistic,' Brammer said. 'It seems to be the standard is let's enjoin any law and we're going to go through the entire process, and then we'll figure it out at the end at the Supreme Court level. I don't think they should be doing so so lightly.' The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 6-2 to endorse the bill. It now goes to the full Senate for consideration. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Pair of proposed bills could limit challenges to Utah laws in courts
SALT LAKE CITY () — A pair of bills being could have a significant impact on legal challenges to laws passed by the Utah legislature. , titled 'Suspensive Appeal Amendments,' specifies that trial court injunctions — which put laws on hold until they're ruled on — would go away as soon as an appeal to that lower court's ruling was filed with the Utah Supreme Court. If S.B. 204 is passed, that would mean that any law being challenged over its constitutionality could stay in effect until the Supreme Court makes a ruling. , otherwise known as 'Judicial Standing Amendments,' could have more far-reaching effects, as it would narrow the criteria for who is eligible to have to bring civil actions against the legislature. Controversial bill requiring mailed ballots to be returned in person with ID advances Under the proposal, only parties who are in a 'legal relationship' — such as a marriage, parent-child relationship, guardianship, or conservatorship — would be allowed to bring civil actions. An association would still be able to file on behalf of its members, as long as the members meet certain requirements. S.B. 203 also gives new powers to Utah's Attorney General's Office to file civil actions of 'significant public importance' without qualifications for standing. Senate leaders — as well as the sponsor of both of these proposals, Sen. Brady Brammer (R – Pleasant Grove) — defended the bills, arguing S.B. 204 is about speeding up the court process and creating a clear separation of powers. 'If there's a law in place… if the law is going to be enjoined or overturned or anything like that, we just want to ensure that it gets to the top and actually the Supreme Court who is tasked with administering the judicial branch that they're the ones making that policy decision where that separation of powers is appropriate,' said Sen. Majority leader Kirk Cullimore (R – Draper). Asst. Majority Whip, Sen. Mike McKell (R – Spanish Fork), who is also an attorney, argued that the change on injunctions was needed for efficiency. 'It's a slow process and I think that's frustrating,' McKell said. 'I think it's frustrating to lawmakers, it's frustrating to my clients, it's frustrating to [Cullimore's clients] but we want efficiency, we want decisions quicker.' The pair were also asked about whether the bills were aimed at Utah's abortion trigger ban. That law is currently on hold via an injunction while the Utah Supreme Court weighs its constitutionality. The abortion trigger ban was initially blocked by a lower court, leaving abortions legal in Utah up until 18 weeks of pregnancy. Laws redrawing political boundaries, as well as laws regarding transgender girls playing in girls' sports were also halted by lower courts — and some remain unsettled. Mckell said he didn't know if this bill was in response to the trigger ban. In a statement, Sen. Brammer argued the lower courts have 'overused' injunctions. 'In this state and in our courts, it has long been the policy to presume laws are constitutional, with doubts resolved in favor of constitutionality. S.B. 204 seeks to ensure that legal tools are used in a way that respects the roles of all three branches of government while also addressing concerns about the overuse of injunctions by courts to block laws passed by the legislature and signed by the governor. I believe this will help protect the integrity of the process of upholding the rule of law in Utah,' he said. On S.B. 204 and the issue of third-party standing, Brammer argued plaintiffs must show harm. 'As Chief Justice Durrant recently noted, 'Since our state's founding, we have required that plaintiffs show … a personal stake in the outcome of [each] legal dispute,'' Brammer said. 'S.B. 203 seeks to maintain access to the justice system for individuals with grievances while protecting the integrity of the courts and helping prevent them from becoming a forum de jour for out-of-state interests that cannot meet the traditional standing requirements.' However, local defense attorney Greg Skordas told that these two bills would have a significant impact on the legal community. 'Senate Bill 203 is an attempt by the legislature to make it harder for groups to challenge the constitutionality of laws they pass. It narrows the definition of individuals or groups who are eligible, (having 'standing') to file a lawsuit contesting the constitutionality of legislation,' he said. 'Both bills are likely unconstitutional and will likely be challenged soon after they are enacted,' Skordas said. He was also critical of the legislature's decision to tweak the judiciary. 'These are the kind of bills that cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars to defend (and ultimately lose) in court,' he said. 'It's really a knee-jerk reaction to our courts and some recent decisions pausing the implementation of questionable legislation until the constitutionality of that legislation can be determined.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
