The high court has declined to hear arguments on Proposition 5, a constitutional amendment approved by Utah voters in 1998 that required a two-thirds majority vote to pass any wildlife-related ballot initiative. All other state referendums require only a simple majority vote.

Opponents of Proposition 5 argued that such a distinction was an unconstitutional restraint of free speech, and took their challenge to federal court, where it was rejected at the district and appeals court levels. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case without comment, as is customary.

Utah officials called the high court's denial a victory for the state's wildlife managers, who they claim would have been micro-managed by public ballot initiatives on wildlife issues.

"This is significant because the decisions for Utah wildlife will be left up to the biologists and other professionals who are closest to the issue," Mike Styler, director of the state's Department of Natural Resources, said in a statement.

However, those who challenged Proposition 5 remain unbowed.

Salt Lake City attorney Lisa Watts Baskin, who spearheaded the local opposition, says the Supreme Court's rejection was not based on the merits. Rather, she maintains it was a case of the issue not being ripe enough for the high court to take on as a constitutional question.

"In terms of our litigation we are no longer moving forward," Baskin said. "But in terms of the merits of the case, that is alive and well. This was greased in the Legislature, the public was misinformed and it silenced an entire group with a particular viewpoint. To me, that's undemocratic."

The Proposition 5 challengers were initially rebuffed by U.S. District Court Judge Tena Campbell, then again by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, which rejected their main argument - that those seeking a voice in how the state manages its wildlife were "marginalized" and "silenced" by Proposition 5.

"The First Amendment ensures that all points of view may be heard; it does not ensure that all points of view are equally likely to prevail," wrote 10th Circuit judge Michael McConnell in a decision that included three dissents and one partial dissent.

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff says the state's residents spoke loudly when they passed Proposition 5.

"This is an important victory for Utah to be able to manage wildlife properly within the state" he said. "Our attorneys should be commended for convincing the courts to validate the will of the people."

jbaird@sltrib.com