In times of great social change, people look to legislators prevent to take colliding trains off a collision course. When legislatures do not act, a vacuum results, placing pressure on courts to decide competing rights—without all the advantages of legislative process, like hearings or the input of multiple stakeholders. This Chapter charts the evolution of Utah’s marriage and nondiscrimination law, from a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and no nondiscrimination protections, to a two-bill package protecting the full LGBT community from discrimination in housing and hiring while cementing more protections around marriage than any other state in America. Utah’s Fairness for All approach avoided looming collisions over a number of questions unanswered in the wake of same-sex marriage, such as who would have a duty under state law to provide solemnization services. Through the legislature’s balancing of competing interests, it crafted a solution that respected all stakeholders in a balanced measure. The lessons gleaned from the Utah Compromise can provide a template for other states seeking to protect LGBT persons from discrimination while respecting religious liberty.