H.B. 487 Legislative Branch Amendments

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see how your own representative and senator voted and where they spoke.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and one-line summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording before you rely on a quote.

What the bill does

This bill modifies and enacts provisions related to the Legislature.

Hearings and debates

• Feb 23, 2026 House Judiciary Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (31 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)51:27

     We will now go to item number two on our agenda. Uh, HB 4 87 legislator Autonomy amendments from Representative MacPherson.

  2. Rep. Matt MacPherson51:39

     Thank you Chair members of the committee. I'll be speaking to the first substitute if you haven't yet seen it. Um, this is a pretty simple bill, honestly, this, uh, outlines, uh, exactly what the role of a legislator is, and according to their own judgment and conscious to open or refrain from opening any legislation in area, any area of code. Um, and then subjecting that, uh, those actions who are rules that is consistent with the constitution. Currently, the specific roles of a legislator to do this is not defined either in code or in the Constitution. So this is just something that proactively seems to be a good measure to establish. Also, if you look at that first substitute, OLR GC has indicated that there is some clarification needed. Currently, after bills are passed, they go through a process of making minor corrections to our bills. Those are done, uh, without changing any of the meaning, without changing any of the effect of the law. But just to handle simple issues like spelling, um, uh, some adjustment in sections of code duplications and other issues. This has been, uh, apparently an issue that was recently discovered, and they asked if it would be inserted into this section of code. It is a, uh, kind of a reification as well. They're moving it from two different areas into one. Um, but that is effectively the extent of the bill and, uh, ends my presentation.

  3. Committee chair (presiding)53:10

     Thank you, Representative MacPherson. We'll go to, uh, clarifying questions from the committee. Representative Hawkins.

  4. Rep. Jon Hawkins53:16

     Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm just curious. I like, I I really like this bill. I'm, I'm curious as to why it's needed. That's a, uh, it's an interesting question, you know, and, and, uh, I, uh, actually went around to a handful of legislators without naming any names, and I asked a couple of just interesting questions. I asked, for example, do you believe you could open a bill file today to repeal prop four? Or do you believe you could go open a bill file to legalize marijuana recreational marijuana in the state of Utah? Um, and surprisingly, um, in both the Senate and the House, I had a number of, uh, legislators respond with either no or I don't know. And there was a, a, a concern in my mind that perhaps that in addition to, um, the questions that come up with undue influence that comes from lobbyists or even from our own caucuses, or even from our own seat mates, um, that could come, come from people in the public, uh, protestors, but also the concern that perhaps even the courts could reach into the mind of a legislator and chill some of the effects that you believe you can take. Obviously, the legislature has powers to run, bills to create or amend or repeal any section of our code. It is up to the body to debate those issues, to vote on those issues, to have public hearings such as these, and then if they are passed to be signed by the governor and then upheld by the courts or struck down by the courts, we each have our own roles to play. And, uh, this was essentially intended to ensure that even the newest and freshest of legislators had a place to look to. Because currently this is not defined anywhere, not in the Constitution and not in code. Thank you. I appreciate That. Thanks.

  5. Committee chair (presiding)55:05

     Thank you, Representative Hawkins. I'm not seeing any further lights for clarifying questions. Is there anyone in the public who would like to speak to this bill that's here today? I'm not seeing anyone in person. Jonathan, is there anyone online? No one online. We will go ahead and come back to the Committee for action. We'll go to Representative Thompson.

  6. Rep. Jason E. Thompson55:28

     Uh, so there's, there's no subs to be adopted, correct? First sub. First sub. There is first sub. Yeah, I moved that we adopt, uh, first sub four house Bill 4 87.

  7. Committee chair (presiding)55:37

     Thank you, Representative Thompson. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  8. Rep. Jason E. Thompson55:41

     Uh, no. I'll waive.

  9. Committee chair (presiding)55:43

     Okay. We'll go back to the sponsor on the motion to adopt. First substitute.

  10. Rep. Matt MacPherson55:48

      Thank you. One thing that that sub does clarify that I neglected to mention in that first section on the legislator's autonomy, there was a section that I think that there were some questions over where it had refrain from voting, um, that was intended to focus on issues like committee hearings where there may not be a quorum. We just removed that to make it just very clear that, um, again, you can open a bill file, you can vote yes or no as far as refraining from voting that was removed to prevent any sort of, uh, misunderstanding.

  11. Committee chair (presiding)56:18

      Thank you, representative Mc Ferguson. Um, discussion to adopt first substitute Representative Abbott.

  12. Rep. Nelson T. Abbott56:25

      Thank you. I do, I should have asked this during clarifying questions, but, um, looking at the second sub first sub, uh, sorry, the first sub, the authority to revise code, I see that a large section is crossed out there, and then it's more or less restated a little bit later. But I was looking at some of these things and I'm just wondering, um, is this intended to be basically exactly what was struck out in the other section? There's no changes because on some of these, you look and it says, for example, rearranging sections or even deleting sections. There's a few things in there that kind of caught my eye, and I'm just wondering, are those all existing code and it's just hard to track 'em from the other section?

  13. Rep. Matt MacPherson57:12

      Uh, yes. Thanks for that clarification. This, this came directly from, uh, O-L-R-G-C. It's not intended to give any new abilities or powers to them. Just a clarification on how their ability to cr uh, clarify the code as passed. There's sometimes just some very simple minor adjustments that need to be made in the bill language before it's adopted into code. This doesn't, this basically does move, yes, a couple of sections into one. It is, there is some clarification, but there is no changes as far as what their abilities are. And if you look at line 2 36, that, um, none of this includes any corrections that would alter the meaning or the effect of law. This is just purely cleanup language for O-L-R-G-C.

  14. Rep. Nelson T. Abbott57:57

      All right, thank you.

  15. Committee chair (presiding)57:59

      Thank you, Representative Abbott. See no further lights on the motion to adopt first substitute. We'll go ahead and do a voice vote. All in favor of adopting first substitute HB 4 87 legislator autonomy amendments. Please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? I rule that passes unanimously. Representative Thompson will go back to you for another motion.

  16. Rep. Jason E. Thompson58:19

      Yeah, I move that we favorably recommend HB 4 8 7 legislator autonomy amendments, um, as substituted

  17. Committee chair (presiding)58:27

      That motion's in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  18. Rep. Jason E. Thompson58:29

      Um, I, um, this bill goes without saying th this just clearly, um, outlines and articulates what our powers and roles are, and our constituents elect us to come here and have a voice for them. And this, um, outlines that we have a voice and it shouldn't be limited. Um, so I, I appreciate the sponsor for his work on this bill.

  19. Committee chair (presiding)58:50

      Thank you, Representative Thompson. We'll go back to the sponsor of the bill on the motion to favorably recommend.

  20. Rep. Matt MacPherson58:55

      I'll waive. Thank you. Okay.

  21. Committee chair (presiding)58:58

      Seeing no further lights on the motion to favorably recommend HB 4 87 first substitute, we'll go back to Representative Thompson first summation on the motion.

  22. Rep. Jason E. Thompson59:07

      I'll waive. Okay.

  23. Committee chair (presiding)59:08

      We'll go ahead and do a voice vote on the motion to favorably recommend first substitute HB 4 87 legislator autonomy amendments from Representative MacPherson. All in favor of that motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. I rule that passage unanimously. Thank you, Representative MacPherson. Thank you. Chair.

  24. Rep. Jason E. Thompson59:25

      Chair. I'd like to make another motion. Okay. If I can, I'd like to make a motion that we place this on the consent calendar. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to it? Uh, no. I'll waive. Okay.

  25. Committee chair (presiding)59:36

      We'll go back to the sponsor of the bill on the motion to add to the consent calendar.

  26. Rep. Matt MacPherson59:42

      Um, I appreciate that motion. I think that's totally in order. I think that there's not really anything, um, new about any of this code. There's some clarifications in existing codes and recon. Um, and I think that it would be appropriate. I appreciate the motion, if that's what the committee would prefer.

  27. Committee chair (presiding)1:00:00

      Excellent. Thank you. Representative MacPherson discussion to the motion to add to the consent calendar. Representative Hawkins?

  28. Rep. Jon Hawkins1:00:05

      Yeah, I think, um, getting to this stage in the legislative session, I think that this needs to go on consent. Um, it's concerning to me that as legislators, we don't know what our role is, that we can open any bill file that we, we feel is necessary. And so, um, putting this on consent and getting it passed through the house and through the process in the Senate, I think is a really good thing. So appreciate the sponsor for bringing it forward and for the, the maker of the motion, putting it on consent.

  29. Committee chair (presiding)1:00:35

      Thank you, Representative Hawkins. Seeing no further lights on, the motion to add to the consent calendar will go to Representative Thompson for summation on that motion,

  30. Rep. Jason E. Thompson1:00:44

      I'll waive. Alright.

  31. Committee chair (presiding)1:00:45

      We'll go ahead and do a voice vote. The motion is to add first substitute HB 4 87 legislator autonomy amendments to the house. Consent calendar. All in favor of that, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. I rule that motion past unanimously. Thank you Representative MacPherson. You want me to keep going?

• Feb 25, 2026 House floor debate (day 36)▶ Watch
  Transcript (3 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)11:55

     Per substitute house Bill 4 87 Legislative branch amendments by Representative MacPherson. This bill was served in judiciary with a vote of 11 0 0 Representatives. We can tell you really excited to be here. It's kind of noisy. Can you tamp it down a little bit? Thank you, Representative MacPherson.

  2. Rep. Matt MacPherson12:16

     Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. Colleagues, this bill is pretty simple. It currently, um, puts into code, um, the role of a legislator, um, currently that is not defined in the Constitution or in our statute. Also, it includes from OLR gc some technical changes that are needed to ensure that, uh, bills after they've passed, um, the House and the Senate and before they're sent for enrolling into our code. Sometimes there's technical changes that need to be made that are just, um, wording, uh, numbers that have to be moved around. They're very technical and they do not affect any of the language or the effect of any of our bills, but the code needs to be updated to allow them to do this properly. Um, and that's the entirety of the bill.

  3. Speaker (presiding)13:00

     Thank you. Representative MacPherson Voting is open on first substitute house Bill 4 87 Legislative branch amendments. Seeing all present, having voted voting will be closed. First substitute house bill 4 87 having received 64 yay votes and zero nay votes passes the house and will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration matter. Meeting clerk

• Mar 2, 2026 Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (13 turns)

  1. Committee chair1:17:32

     Next we have first substitute house Bill, 4 87 legislative branch amendments.

  2. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:17:39

     Thank you again. Um, so this is also a very simple bill. Currently we don't have, um, well, let me back up. Th this bill basically just is two very simple things. One, it, uh, sets in code the actual, um, powers of a legislator. Surprisingly, it's not in code or in the constitution right now. We have a lot of new legislators, especially in the house every year. And there are some questions that come up from time to time in this area. Um, so we decided to put that into code. And then O-L-R-G-C has contacted us. The whole, basically second half of this section is kind of a reification. They make some minor adjustments to what are the, um, the code sections that allow them to adjust our bills after we've passed them in both the House and the Senate before they get, um, actually injected into the code. There is some times where they need to make some corrections to titles, chapters headings, spelling things that don't affect the actual meaning, uh, or effect of the law. Um, but they have identified that there are some sections of, of their existing statute that aren't quite clear and they need that cleared up before the, uh, session ends. So those, those changes came from O-L-R-G-C and we inserted them here.

  3. Committee chair1:18:59

     Okay. Senator Vickers.

  4. Sen. Evan J. Vickers1:19:01

     Yeah, I, I guess I'm struggling with the lines 35 through 40 with the one specifically you're talking about, you're putting in code. It is like, I mean, that's current practice. I mean, it seems, why do we have to have that in code?

  5. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:19:17

     It's a good question and it's something that has come up probably more so on the house than on the Senate side. I would imagine, uh, where there's a little bit more tenure there. Um, I'm not calling anyone old, I'm just saying, um, on the house side. Uh, though we do get, uh, a lot of turnover, a lot of new, uh, a lot of new legislators. Um, and there's some questions that come up from time to time. One question that was actually brought up, uh, amongst, uh, some house members, which had an interesting answer. Um, and uh, and this isn't intended to be a political statement, but a question was brought, could a legislator, um, uh, a house member, for example, open a bill file to repeal Prop four? And many of the new house members said either no or they didn't know, um, believing that the courts had told them that they didn't have the authority to do so. And there was some discussion about whether or not, um, the individual legislators understood that their power when it came to opening and running bills and amending and repealing laws is a separate process than the process of the courts to look at those cases. Similar question came up to, um, the constitutionality or the legal ability to, uh, allow, um, uh, marijuana recreationally in Utah. Similar answers from similar legislators. So there was some discussion about looking back at the code, looking back at the Constitution on how some of the fundamental powers of the legislature, which are assumed to be well known and assumed to be, uh, our practice don't actually exist in any sort of definition. So this is intended to just put it in a place that people can refer to. Um, it is, there's nothing in here that would be, uh, considered, I don't believe, um, to be in any way, uh, controversial or, um, uh, concerning to anyone. But it just is a place that we can put it. So that can be referred to, I guess I'm not saying it's controversial, I'm just saying it's not needed because we already have an legislative rule if nothing else. Yeah. And I, I, I, I think the only, the only reason I would say that, uh, perhaps not is just simply from the example I provided with, um, perhaps you could say more training would be necessary for new legislators. And, um, I don't, I don't, uh, actually, uh, have any problem with that. I think new legislators could probably use a lot more, uh, instruction and training and, and some of our processes. Um, but uh, this was just intended to put something in code that could be pointed to for the future.

  6. Committee chair1:21:45

     Thank you. Okay, thank you. Let's go to public comment. Uh, okay. We have one in the room. Come on up.

  7. Maryann Christensen, Executive Director, Utah Legislative Watch1:21:57

     Maryanne Christensen, executive director of Utah Legislative Watch. And I think this bill is vitally important. You guys have this in your rules and this is what you do already. But I think it's important to have it in statute because I think it's important for the citizenry of Utah to understand that this is your power. We have a judiciary right now that is trying to be, well, a judicial tyrant. And, um, I think that the legislature could have and should have taken actions when they didn't. I think that the executive branch could have and should have taken actions when they didn't. And I think that whatever we can do to show in our statute that we understand the, um, division of powers in our, in our representative government, I think that it's just really good for the citizens of Utah. Um, we need to get away from the whole population of the state of Utah thinking that whatever the justices decide is now the law of Utah. So Thank you very much for voting

  8. Committee chair1:23:06

     for the bill. All right. Close public comment. Come back for further consideration or action from the committee.

  9. Sen. Michael K. McKell1:23:25

     Senator ml. Thank you. I move that we favorably recommend the bill before us.

  10. Committee chair1:23:30

      Okay. That bill is first substitute house Bill 4 87. Discussion to that motion. Let's go back to the sponsor of the bill.

  11. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:23:41

      I appreciate the committee's, um, questions on this. And, um, if there's any other concerns, I'm happy to just keep working on it as it brings forward to the Senate floor.

  12. Sen. Michael K. McKell1:23:53

      Okay. Back to Senator ml. I'll waive.

  13. Committee chair1:23:57

      All right, all those in favor of first substitute house bill 4 87 out favorably say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No Nay who are Making, okay. So we got Senator Bloom and Senator Plumb as na, the arrested in the affirmative. So that passes. Thank you.

All votes

• 11-0-0House Judiciary Committee · House Comm - Substitute Recommendation · Feb 23, 2026Roll call
• 11-0-0House Judiciary Committee · House Comm - Favorable Recommendation · Feb 23, 2026Roll call
• 11-0-0House Judiciary Committee · House Comm - Consent Calendar Recommendation · Feb 23, 2026Roll call
• 64-0-11House floor · House/ passed 3rd reading · Feb 25, 2026Roll call
• 4-2-1Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Senate Comm - Favorable Recommendation · Mar 2, 2026Roll call

Tallies are yeas–nays–absent.