Utah Supreme Court declines Legislature's request to block new congressional map

SALT LAKE CITY — A Utah Supreme Court panel denied the Legislature's request to stay a district court ruling implementing a new congressional map. Lawmakers in January appealed an August 2025 ruling that invalidated the congressional map they adopted in 2021, asking the high court to block a remedial map that created a Democratic-leaning district in Salt Lake County. But a three-justice panel composed of Chief Justice Matthew Durrant, Justice Paige Petersen and Associate Chief Justice Jill Pohlman on Friday dismissed the Legislature's appeal, saying it did not have proper jurisdiction over the case. The justices wrote that state code gave lawmakers 30 days to appeal the Aug. 25, 2025, ruling, but the Legislature instead asked the district court to stay its injunction blocking the 2021 map. That motion was denied. Lawmakers did not appeal a subsequent November ruling by 3rd District Judge Dianna Gibson which adopted the remedial map that is now in place. The Legislature then asked the district court in December to certify the August ruling so that it could appeal the final order.

The district court granted the request in part but declined to certify the entire case because it said some claims in the ongoing case were still pending. "Rule 54(b) does not allow for immediate review of an order where that order does not finally resolve plaintiffs' claim," the justices wrote. "And here, no claim has been certified as final. Thus, certification under rule 54(b) is improper and we lack jurisdiction over legislative defendants' appeal." The justices said the August order raises "important legal issues that warrant timely appellate review," and said that if lawmakers appealed either recent ruling within 30 days, the high court would have had jurisdiction over the appeal. Leaders of both the state House and Senate did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Utah Democratic Party celebrated the ruling, calling it "a resounding victory for voters and fair elections." "Prop 4 was passed to end partisan gerrymandering and put power back in the hands of the people, and today the courts made it clear: Lawmakers cannot ignore the law to protect their own political interests," it said on social media. The case has been ongoing for several years after a handful of plaintiffs alleged lawmakers violated Utahns' rights when they overturned the state's anti-gerrymandering law known as Proposition 4 and replaced it with a different law. The Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that lawmakers overreached by replacing Proposition 4, which was narrowly approved by the voters. Gibson threw out their map last year and later adopted a remedial map for the 2026 midterm elections.

Related topics