Utah Governor Leavitt supports polygamy - Ex-polygamist wives protest!

July, 1998

Utah either should enforce its ban on polygamy or get the laws off the books, contends a Utah group of ex-wives who have fled plural marriages.

Tapestry of Polygamy on Monday urged Gov. Mike Leavitt to take a firm stand against the illegal practice of plural marriage. The women claim polygamy imprisons wives and children in exploitative domestic relationships.

``You have publicly implied that you have no intentions of enforcing anti-polygamy and bigamy laws, which is contrary to the obligations of your office,'' read the group's director, Vicky Prunty, from a letter to Leavitt. ``In the eyes of the honest law-abiding citizens of Utah, this is deplorable. We demand action.''

The group took its new hard-line stand in reaction to remarks by the governor last week at his monthly news conference. Leavitt suggested prosecution of polygamists has been shelved by Utah and other states for legal reasons. Plural marriage may be protected by the First Amendment as an expression of religion, he said.

That argument has been rejected repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court, notes University of Utah law professor Michael McConnell.

Although those decisions date back decades, McConnell said, ``even today, I suspect there would be no protection under the free-exercise [of religion] clause of the First Amendment.''

He added: ``Polygamists have a better shot under modern privacy doctrines . . . against a backdrop where the state does not prosecute people for cohabitation.''

A defendant could argue he was being singled out for unfair selective prosecution, pointing to the decades since the last prosecutions for adultery, fornication and polygamy, McConnell said.

More than a century ago, Utah outlawed polygamy as a condition for statehood after The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints formally forbade the practice in 1890.

Some Utahns still take multiple wives, however, following what they believe are the true teachings of church founder Joseph Smith.

Though practicing polygamists face excommunication from the LDS Church, Utah authorities have not prosecuted anyone for polygamy since the 1950s.

The real obstacles to prosecution often are practical hurdles -- the difficulty of gathering evidence, other crimes that take priority.

``First, we couldn't get a jury to convict and second, we don't have the resources,'' said Paul Boyden, executive director of the State Association of Prosecutors. ``There's been no public outcry to do it.''

Proving polygamy would require firsthand evidence that usually is impossible to obtain, said Box Elder County Prosecutor Jon Bunderson.

``There's never anybody to testify,'' Bunderson said. ``You never have the evidence because no one ever complains.''

A successful prosecution probably would hinge on testimony from a polygamous spouse willing to work with authorities, Boyden said.

But that cooperation has pitfalls -- it could put the spouse at risk for prosecution, or jurors may discount testimony from a disgruntled witness, he said.

Jurors might reason, ``at least these people are making a pretense of marriage, rather than just shacking up,'' Boyden said.

Utah's Constitution states, ``polygamous or plural marriages are forever prohibited.''

But no specific statute makes polygamy illegal, said Reed Richards, chief deputy Utah attorney general.

Instead, a polygamy prosecution probably would be filed under the state's bigamy law, he said.

Eliminating that law would halt legitimate prosecutions for fraudulent repeat marriages, he pointed out.

Tapestry of Polygamy interpreted Leavitt's remarks as official indifference toward a marital tradition that they contend forces teen-age girls into unwanted marriages with family members and chains them to a life of isolation.

``I had no civil rights as a child abused in my polygamist home,'' said Tapestry member Laura Chapman, the 27th in a line of 31 children. ``While the leaders were claiming religious freedom, the state of Utah was closing their eyes.''

Tapestry's letter to Leavitt added: ``We don't believe our Founding Fathers would ever have wanted abuse to be protected behind religious freedom.''

Vicki Varela, spokeswoman for Leavitt, said the governor reiterated that polygamy is against the law and has asked Atty. Gen. Jan Graham to provide a summary of her policies on prosecuting polygamists.

``He has stated before and states again, it is absolutely critical that any human-rights violations and abuse be aggressively prosecuted,'' Varela said.

Leavitt's freedom-of-religion comments have won applause from an unlikely source -- the American Civil Liberties Union, which long has contended the government ought to stay out of citizens' private lives.

``How are you going to go out and prosecute polygamists. . . . It's totally impractical,'' said Carol Gnade, director of the ACLU's Utah chapter. ``The governor couldn't have articulated the issues better. For abuses within that framework, they can be addressed with other criminal laws.''

Indeed, in a case that has spurred much of the current debate, Box Elder Prosecutor Bunderson will try a polygamist leader on a felony child-abuse charge for allegedly taking a belt to his 16-year-old daughter after she ran away from a forced marriage to her uncle.

The John Daniel Kingston case also brings attention to the lack of support for women and children trying to escape polygamous communities.

``We can't expect women to leave abusive relationships when they have nowhere to go,'' said Prunty, Tapestry's director. ``Blind faith should not be an alternative.''

The women said they recognize that evidence of abuse in polygamous relationships is difficult to obtain. ``Most of the groups live in secrecy. The women have no way to come out and take a stand,'' said group leader Carmen Thompson. ``It's not an easy fix, but we have to start somewhere.''

Leavitt clarifies polygamy stand

He makes it clear he doesn't condone it or its supporters

Last updated 08/01/1998, 12:01 a.m. MT

By Lucinda Dillon Deseret News staff writer

Gov. Mike Leavitt does not condone polygamy, nor is he sympathetic to its practices, the state's chief executive said in a hastily called press conference Friday afternoon.

"I just want to assure that the position of the state is clear," the governor told a roomful of reporters gathered in his office at the Utah State Capitol.

And he is not aligned in any way with groups who want the state to reverse its position on polygamy. "I do not support that."

Leavitt's office called the news gathering less than an hour after a pro-polygamy group thanked the governor and Carol Gnade, executive director for Utah's American Civil Liberties Union, for what it perceived as support to the polygamy cause.

The Women's Religious Liberties Union held its first meeting Thursday evening. Mary Potter, founder of the group, said Friday she wanted to thank Leavitt and Gnade for "stating polygamists have protection under the constitution."

The group declares its mission is not religious but political: It wants Utah to repeal the state law that bans polygamy forever.

Leavitt said Friday that's not likely to happen. "Polygamy is prohibited by the Utah Constitution. It is against the law and it should be."

In meetings this week with local, state and federal prosecutors, Leavitt said he learned why polygamy isn't prosecuted.

First, it's hard to prove because polygamous marriages are conducted in private, making them difficult to document in court. There are legal impediments that include at least one Supreme Court ruling that a child cannot be removed from a home because of polygamy.

And there are higher priorities, he said, such as murder, rape, gang violence and drug dealing.

"I'd like to make an important point," Leavitt told reporters. "I learned this week that the First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom is not among the reasons prosecutors do not prosecute."

Leavitt has been beleaguered by criticism and discussion since last week when he speculated that polygamy may be protected under the First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom. The comments drew nationwide attention, and support groups for women trying to escape polygamy sharply criticized the governor.

"Although the recent furor over polygamy has been unpleasant, the recent discussion has a positive consequence if it focuses attention on a lifestyle where abuses too easily can be shrouded in silence and secrecy," Leavitt said.

On Friday, the governor addressed several other questions on the subject:

What sort of approach are you going to suggest in prosecuting abuses within the polygamist community?

"I would call on local prosecutors to recognize that this is an important area that needs to be prosecuted. If anyone is being abused, domestically or otherwise or if their human rights are being being violated or their civil rights, (prosecutors) need to act aggressively. Period."

How can you have a higher priority than children if these children are being raised in these conditions?

"I am not here to make legal interpretations, that's not my training, but as I talk to prosecutors, they tell me there are aspects of the law that make it difficult," he said.

"The bottom line with prosecutors is that if you pump resources into polygamy and for that matter cohabitation, that murderers walk."

Will you urge prosecutors to pursue polygamy (as a crime) itself?

"What I've suggested is that any abuse of human rights or civil rights needs to be aggressively prosecuted."

What about polygamy itself?

"I've talked to federal prosecutors. It's clear to me they don't intend to change their practices. As I have talked to state prosecutors . . . and local prosecutors, they have told me the same thing. That is their priority for the reasons I have already enumerated. I do not expect that will change."

If it's not being enforced, why not just change the law?

"There are a number of laws, prosecutors point out, that fall into this category. Adultery, fornication, sodomy, all fall into areas that in my judgment are clearly wrong.

"Those who would advocate changing the law simply because they go forward and we don't enforce them . . . I don't think that's the right solution either. There is a teaching ethic to the law. There is a community standard establishment of the law. I think that's an important reason to keep those in place."

Some discussion addressed the recent child abuse case involving John Daniel Kingston, a member of the Kingston polygamist clan, which includes at least two members who are lawyers. The Utah State Bar requires members to swear they will uphold Utah law.

What about the practice of appointing practicing polygamists to state positions in government and having lawyers practicing law who are known polygamists?

"I know the bar is going to undertake that discussion, and I'll leave that one to them. I suspect there are people that live lifestyles that I might not agree with that I've appointed to places and that have been appointed in other states. I have not seen that as the sole criteria for those appointments."

So polygamy is not a reason not to appoint a person?

"No, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that. I recognize that there may have been one or two people who practice this. I have not made it a criteria for my appointment. I do not know whether they are or whether they aren't. If you ask them, they'll tell you they're not. And for the same reasons it's difficult to prosecute these cases, it's difficult for governors to know whether they are or they aren't either."

So is it a "don't-ask-don't-tell" policy?

"It's a policy that sometimes you just don't know."

Are you uncomfortable with the fact that your ancestors and many of our ancestors embraced this practice and now 150 years later you must say it's wrong?

"I am among thousands of other Utahns who have somewhere in their heritage multiple families. That has nothing to do with my life today. There is no place for it in modern society, and therefore all I can do is delineate what I think is right today."