This is an archived article that was published on in 2014, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

In a plea for diversity ("Utah's high court needs religious diversity," Aug. 10), the Tribune's editorial board urged Gov. Herbert to fill Justice Ronald Nehring's vacant seat on the Utah Supreme Court with another non-Mormon. The editorial called the appointment of a justice with this characteristic the governor's "duty."

Such a position might be appropriate if the board were able to support it with an example of a single case in which Justice Nehring's opinion seemed better or more enlightened due to his not being part of what the board termed the state's "theocracy." Alternatively, the position would have appeared justified had the editorial cited a single case in which an LDS justice's opinion seemed biased by his or her religion.

On the contrary, the board went out of its way to praise the work of all the justices.

All other things being equal, which sometimes they are, I'd support the appointment of a non-Mormon. However, I'll be honest about my rationale (it does look a little better), but I'll not make silly statements about the governor's duty to promote diversity where the advantage of doing so is neither apparent nor clear.

D. James Croft


comments powered by Disqus