These divergent views are at the crux of a hearing set for Monday before the state Supreme Court. Justices are considering an appeal by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff of a 3rd District Court ruling last August that supported the U.'s right to maintain its 28-year no-guns policy.

"The only issue before the court will be whether the state constitution protects the university's right of autonomy," said U. attorney Alan Sullivan. The university will not be making a case about the scope of the state's Uniform Firearm Act or the Concealed Weapon Act, he said.

His opponent, Assistant Attorney General Brent Burnett, agrees. But Burnett casts the issue in a slightly different light: "Does the state constitution give some kind of autonomy to the U., allowing it to disregard state law?"

To date, the nearly 3-year-old legal battle has cost the U. $218,455. U. Vice President Paul Brinkman said because the university is suing its owner, money to cover legal fees must come from sources of revenue other than taxpayers.

The battle erupted in 2002 under then-President Bernie Machen, who sued the state to maintain the U.'s policy. It began in federal court but was bumped to state court where the U. prevailed in August 2003.

New U. President Michael Young said he is eager to resolve the divisive issue. He supports the school's gun-ban policy.

"I don't see it as a good thing to encourage people to bring guns on campus," he told The Salt Lake Tribune Editorial Board last week. He said parents expect the university to keep their children safe.

U. officials say concealed guns in classrooms would interfere with teaching and impair academic freedom.

In Shurtleff's brief to the state's top court, the attorney general said the Utah Constitution contains no right to academic freedom for the state's public colleges and universities, and that the U. cannot continue to defy the will of the Legislature and ban guns from its campus.

If the state's high court rules that the U. does not have right to set its own policy, administrators must comply with state law, assistant AG Burnett said.

"At that point, the U. will have the option of going back to federal court, claiming there is some kind of federal constitutional right for the university to do something different from that of the state, which owns it," Burnett said.

Should the state lose, the issue becomes moot, he said. The Utah Supreme Court is the final arbiter of state laws.

sykes@sltrib.com