The Legislature has officially censured Utah State Board of Education member Natalie Cline. The resolution came in response to her social media post that targeted a high school student in the Granite School District.
Cline’s now-deleted Facebook post from Feb. 6 falsely implied the student-athlete might be transgender and didn’t fit in on the girls’ basketball team. The post was met with immediate condemnation and calls for her resignation.
Lawmakers did not go as far as impeaching Cline and removing her from office, which only they have the power to do. Leadership in the Republican majority repeatedly called the move “historic” and “unprecedented” since the Legislature had never censured someone before, as far as they could find in the body’s history.
“The Legislature of the state of Utah, the Governor concurring therein, condemns and denounces board member Cline's repugnant attack on a student in the strongest possible terms and finds such behavior irreconcilable with the responsibilities of a Utah State Board of Education member,” the resolution reads.
“It’s not the resolution we were hoping for,” the student’s father, Al van der Beek, told KUER in a text message, “but it’s a step in the right direction.”
In an op-ed in The Salt Lake Tribune on the day of the vote, the girl’s parents called on lawmakers to “do the right thing” and “move towards impeachment of Natalie Cline.” They also told House Republicans what they wanted. Now, van der Beek said they will wait to see if Cline listens to what the board, and many others, have called on her to do and step down.
“It might send a bigger message if the people of Utah have had their eyes opened a little more as a result of all of this and don’t re-elect her,” he said.
Cline is running for re-election. Her current term ends Jan. 6, 2025. As lawmakers have only reprimanded her, she is still eligible for another term.
After the backlash, lawmakers said they would look at potential disciplinary action but were quiet about what they thought that would be until they published the text of the censure resolution on Feb. 15.
The House then suspended rules so they could immediately vote on the resolution instead of waiting for it to go through the normal steps. Before voting, several lawmakers shared their disappointment and disgust with Cline’s actions.
Minority Leader Angela Romero said she had a substitute resolution ready to impeach Cline, but floor debate was cut short before she could bring it up. Democrats said they were “deeply disappointed” the House did not publicly discuss impeaching Cline.
The House vote was 72-2. Democratic Rep. Brett Garner and Republican Rep. Phil Lyman voted against it.
Garner wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, that he was against the resolution not because he was against disciplining Cline, but because he didn’t think it went far enough.
“Passing this resolution without beginning impeachment is a endorsement of her actions, not a censure,” Garner wrote.
As quickly as it passed in the House, it then moved to the Senate, where they also suspended the rules to take it up. The vote was unanimous in favor of the resolution. Gov. Spencer Cox immediately signed it. In a statement, he said the “vast majority of Utahns agree that Natalie Cline’s behavior was unacceptable.”
“We agree with the actions of both the State Board of Education and Legislature, and we hope the voters will hold her equally accountable this fall,” Cox added.
The Legislature’s action follows the Utah State Board of Education’s unanimous decision on Feb. 14 to censure Cline and limit her participation in board matters. They also asked her to step down by Feb. 19.
Before the state school board acted against her, Cline claimed on Facebook that the board's meeting was “election interference.” Speaker of the House Mike Schultz told reporters that in his conversation last week with Cline, she “feels like she’s the victim in this” and said he was disappointed with her comments.
The Republican majority discussed impeachment, he said after the vote, but ultimately decided the national attention would give Cline a platform and do more harm than good.
“I don’t think that’s what’s best for the girl, for the family.” Schultz said the impeachment process would make the family a “political football.”
While some members in his caucus wanted impeachment, Schultz said they also didn’t have enough votes for the necessary two-thirds majority.
Since lawmakers have never censured someone before, Senate President Stuart Adams told reporters it sends a clear message about the gravity of the situation.
He said the state school board’s actions did “probably 80% of what impeachment does.”
Although the board limited Cline’s participation as much as they had the power to, Cline still can vote during regular board meetings, make motions and propose amendments.
Adams acknowledged that while a censure would be on her record, it does not include anything that restricts her and she could be reelected. But he didn’t want to speak for voters and said they will ultimately get to decide.
“This isn't about a reelection to me. This isn't about trying to manage or micromanage an election process. This is a matter about standing up. Calling something right or wrong. We've called it wrong.”
They didn’t want to elongate the process, he said, and acted as quickly as possible after weighing their options.
Van der Beek still thinks the censure “was a step forward that fights against hate and bullying.”
Through it all, the family has never said they “hate” Cline for what she did. The message they’ve been focused on is offering love, support and understanding to everyone. To their daughter and to any kid who is struggling.
“A message for others: We need to be better than this. We are better than this! Love will always outshine the darkness of evil.”
