Utah GOP lawmakers outline their next steps for fighting judge's redistricting ruling

SALT LAKE CITY — In the latest step in Utah's fight over redistricting, Gov. Spencer Cox said he plans to call a special session next month, while Republican lawmakers pursue a constitutional amendment to "clarify" their ability to alter ballot initiatives approved by voters.

During his monthly news conference on Tuesday, Cox said details of the special session on Dec. 9 were still being worked out, and more information would be provided soon. Legislative leaders billed it as an opportunity to "ensure our election system has the clarity it needs" in the wake of 3rd District Judge Dianna Gibson's decision to adopt a new congressional map while rejecting one that lawmakers had drawn.

GOP lawmakers promised to appeal the decision to the Utah Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, in a separate news conference, Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, announced that the constitutional amendment would be placed on the 2026 ballot, but he did not provide specifics on the proposal other than to say it will address what he called the "growing concern" about ballot initiatives conflicting with the Utah Constitution or other state laws.

"We believe very firmly that the Legislature should be able to change — like it was originally intended — we have the ability to change initiatives, and people ought to clarify that," Adams told KSL.

The congressional map adopted by Gibson includes a district entirely concentrated in Salt Lake County, which is more favorable to Democrats. Multiple Democrats have already announced plans to run for the seat in the 2026 midterm elections.

'This is not a turf war'

Top legislative Republicans say Gibson's decision has unleashed "chaos" and "confusion" around the state's congressional map going into next year's elections, while also undermining lawmakers' authority to draw political boundaries.

"We cannot continue relying solely on reactive, case-by-case responses of the court. That is not the best way for the state of Utah to be governed," Adams said. "Utah deserves a process that is clear, functional and accountable."

House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, called the map adopted by Gibson "flat-out sloppy." The Legislature last week tried to block the new map from taking effect, citing "boundary issues" identified by the lieutenant governor's office, and Schultz on Tuesday said he continues to hear from counties of "additional problems with the maps that we didn't know about until the last 24 hours."

Initially, some GOP lawmakers threatened to pursue impeachment against Gibson over her ruling, but Schultz said the Legislature was "not focused on that right now." Cox also poured cold water on that idea, saying he hadn't seen anything that would "rise to that level."

Meanwhile, details about the planned special session next month were vague, but lawmakers could consider changing the candidate filing deadline to give more time to sort out the ongoing legal questions. Candidates have until Jan. 2, 2026, to file to run in next year's elections, giving little runway for the courts to consider an appeal before then.

Cox said he supports the Legislature's plan to appeal the new congressional map. He also condemned threats that were made against the judge and court employees – calling them "completely inappropriate" — while rejecting calls to not follow Gibson's ruling.

"You don't disobey judicial orders," Cox said. "That's not something our administration will ever do."

Cox did not provide further details about the proposed constitutional amendment, but he expressed unease about a "constant round of initiatives" seen in other states like California and Oregon.

"I have deep, deep concerns about a state that is run via direct democracy," Cox said. "The founders had those same concerns."

The House speaker said it's wrong to frame this fight over redistricting as a "power struggle" between the Legislature and the judiciary.

"This is not a turf war," Schultz said. "It's about the trust Utahns have placed in us to carry out the most fundamental constitutional duties. We intend to honor that trust."

How we got here

The fight over redistricting dates back to 2018, when voters narrowly approved Proposition 4, which created an independent commission to recommend new political boundaries to lawmakers every 10 years, along with standards for new maps. But lawmakers replaced the initiative in 2021, making the commission's role advisory, and then went ahead with their own map over those drawn by the commission.

That map split Salt Lake County into each of the state's four congressional districts, prompting outcries from some citizens who said the map diluted their voting power. Mormon Women for Ethical Government, the League of Women Voters of Utah and several individuals sued the Legislature in 2022, saying the maps were an illegal partisan gerrymander and that lawmakers violated the people's power by repealing and replacing Proposition 4.

The plaintiffs won a major victory with the Utah Supreme Court last summer when the justices ruled lawmakers had overreached by changing Proposition 4.

Gibson then threw out the 2021 map in August and told lawmakers to adopt a new one to comply with Proposition 4's redistricting standards. The lawmakers begrudgingly did so, but Gibson ultimately selected a map submitted by the plaintiffs, calling the Legislature's map an "extreme partisan outlier."

Critics respond

Elizabeth Rasmussen, executive director of Better Boundaries, said the Legislature's announcement Tuesday feels like a repeat of the fight over Amendment D, which lawmakers tried to place on the 2024 ballot to allow them to change voter initiatives. But Amendment D was eventually blocked by Gibson over problems with how it was written by legislative leaders.

"Instead of taking a closer look at the concerns Utahns have voiced about representation, we're seeing recycled ideas that narrow the public's role," Rasmussen said in a statement. "Ballot initiatives are already a last resort for people who don't feel heard. Trust in government is low, and proposals like this don't rebuild it."

House Minority Leader Angela Romero, D-Salt Lake City, expressed similar concerns. She said she opposes holding a special session next month, in part due to the cost.

"Nobody in my caucus supports challenging the judge's ruling," Romero told KSL. "The will of the people spoke. The majority spoke. They said they wanted certain kinds of maps, and we didn't follow that."

As for the proposed constitutional amendment, Romero said it might "backfire" on legislative Republicans if voters express the same sentiments they did in 2018 when they passed Proposition 4.

"Who knows?" Romero said. "They might give us more seats in the House and in the Senate."

Related topics