Utah Supreme Court hands big win to plaintiffs in anti-gerrymandering lawsuit

The entrance to the Utah Supreme Court inside the Matheson Courthouse in Salt Lake City is pictured on Wednesday, January 3, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch)

The Utah Supreme Court on Thursday handed a major win to those legally challenging the Utah Legislature’s 2021 redistricting process. 

While it’s a significant ruling, the fight — which could have major implications for Utah’s 2026 congressional boundaries and future voter initiatives — isn’t over yet. The case now goes back to Third District Court for a trial. 

In a unanimous opinion posted on the court’s website Thursday morning ahead of its anticipated 10 a.m. publication, the Utah Supreme Court reversed a district court’s decision to dismiss part of the League of Women Voters of Utah’s lawsuit.   The League argued that the Utah Legislature violated Utahns’ constitutional right to alter and reform their government when lawmakers repealed and replaced Proposition 4, the citizen-driven ballot initiative to enact an independent commission to draw Utah’s new boundaries in the 2021 redistricting process.

The League of Women Voters — along with the group Mormon Women for Ethical Government and individual Salt Lake County residents who alleged they were disenfranchised by unlawful gerrymandering — have claimed the Utah Legislature overstepped when it repealed and replaced the group Better Boundaries’ voter-approved 2018 initiative that outlined a process for adopting independently-drawn maps. 

A Third District Court judge later dismissed that claim. But the Utah Supreme Court determined on Thursday that it “erred” in doing so.

“We hold that the people’s right to alter or reform the government through an initiative is constitutionally protected from government infringement, including legislative amendment, repeal, or replacement of the initiative in a manner that impairs the reform enacted by the people,” Justice Paige Petersen wrote in the opinion. “Thus, an alleged violation of the people’s exercise of these rights presents a legally cognizable claim on which relief may be granted.”

League of Women Voters v. Utah State Legislature20240711

While Utah voters passed a ballot initiative in 2018 to create the independent commission to draw maps in Utah’s redistricting process — a process that occurs every 10 years — the Utah Legislature later passed a law, SB200, to turn that independent commission into merely an advisory role. Ultimately in 2021, the supermajority Republican-controlled Utah Legislature opted to ignore all of the maps that the independent commission created, and adopted maps it drew on its own. 

The congressional map, the Utah League of Women Voters and other plaintiffs argued, was an “extreme partisan gerrymander” because it “cracked” Democratic voters, breaking them up and dispersing them among other congressional districts, “diluting their electoral strength and stifling their contrary viewpoints.”

If the plaintiffs can prove in Third District Court that SB200 violated Utahns constitutional rights, Proposition 4 would “become controlling law,” Petersen wrote.

Under Proposition 4, if the facts alleged by Plaintiffs are proven true, it is likely that the Congressional Map cannot stand.

– Utah Supreme Court Justice Paige Petersen wrote in the court's unanimous opinion.

When the Legislature repealed Proposition 4 and replaced it with SB200, that “nullified Proposition 4’s key provisions,” according to the plaintiff’s arguments. The Utah Supreme Court ruled the Legislature’s power to “amend, repeal and enact statutes does not defeat this claim as a matter of law.” 

“Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s dismissal of (that claim),” the opinion said. “And we remand this case, with (that claim) intact, to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” 

While the Utah Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of that claim — written as Count V — it did not address the district court’s rulings on other counts alleged in the complaint because “those claims may become moot depending on the ultimate resolution of Count V.” 

The other counts in the lawsuit include the League of Women Voters’ claims that the Utah Legislature’s “gerrymandered” congressional map violated multiple provisions of the Utah Constitution, including the free elections clause and the right to vote. 

A Third District Court Judge in 2022 dismissed the league’s claims that the repeal and replacement of Proposition 4 was unlawful, but denied the Utah Legislature’s motion to dismiss the other claims. 

“Accordingly, those claims are stayed for the time being,” the opinion states. “If the adjudication of Count V does not moot or otherwise resolve Counts I through IV, we will resolve Defendants’ appeal of those claims.”

Ruling sends shockwaves through Utah — glee for gerrymandering critics, fury from Republican leaders

As news of the Utah Supreme Court’s ruling spread Thursday, Utah’s Democrats and anti-gerrymandering groups were giddy, while Utah’s Republican legislative leaders were furious.

“Today marks a significant victory for representative democracy in Utah,” Better Boundaries executive director Katie Wright said in a prepared statement. “The people of Utah voted in 2018 for more transparency and accountability from our state government and today the Utah Supreme Court affirmed it. We look forward to the day when Utah voters can finally pick their own politicians, not the other way around.”

Better Boundaries is not a plaintiff in the lawsuit, but it continues to advocate for an independent redistricting process. After Proposition 4 passed, the group negotiated with legislative leaders as it became clear that the Legislature was gearing up to override the ballot initiative. 

In a press conference held at the Utah Capitol on Thursday, Wright along with the lawsuit’s plaintiffs’ celebrated the ruling.

“This is a historic day for the people of Utah,” Wright said, thanking everyone who supported the 2018 ballot initiative, as well as those that continue to fight. “You made this possible. It took all of us. I’m exceedingly grateful for your commitment to democracy.”

Plaintiffs including Victoria and Malcolm Reid, of Millcreek, as well as representatives for the League of Women Voters Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government, who also spoke at Thursday’s news conference, expressing gratitude for the ruling.

The Reids, who said they have family connections in Utah that go back several generations, said when they moved to the state in 2018, “we intentionally looked” for neighborhoods “with a mix of political opinions, where our voices would be heard.” They chose Millcreek because it has had a history of contested congressional elections, Malcolm said. Millcreek is a neighborhood in Salt Lake County, Utah’s most urban and populated county — and also the county with the highest concentration of Democratic voters.

However, Malcolm Reid said they felt disregarded after the Utah Legislature’s 2021 redistricting process.

“The Utah Legislature ignored the good faith of the independent commission, and instead adopted highly gerrymandered maps, created in secret at the last moment and with no citizen input,” he said.

But now, Malcolm Reid said the Utah Supreme Court’s ruling affirms Utahns “have the right” to alter and reform their government with a ballot initiative.

Let us know what you think...

“I’ve heard much about the ‘Utah Way’ since moving here,” he said, referring to a catch-all phrase Utah leaders like to use when describing collaborative policy making. “As someone who cares about Utah, the way forward must enable all of Utah’s people to have a voice.”

Elevate Strategies, a Democratic consulting firm said the ruling has major implications for future Utah ballot initiatives — and could ultimately lead to new redistricting maps for the 2026 election cycle.

“Today’s ruling is a massive win for democracy in Utah. These new maps will put an end to partisan gerrymandering, which has led to extreme legislation and voter disenfranchisement,” said Gabi Finlayson, senior partner at Elevate Strategies. 

The ruling “mandates a strict scrutiny test” for lawmakers to make changes to ballot initiatives, Elevate Strategies said. “Under this standard, nearly any legislative attempt to alter such initiatives is unconstitutional.”

The firm expects the district court to now rule in favor of the League of Women Voters and other plaintiffs, “requiring an independent redistricting commission to redraw all congressional, legislative and state board of education districts, likely before the 2026 election cycle.”

“Utah is at an inflection point,” Finlayson said. “The will of the people has been hindered by unconstitutional districts and unchecked extreme politicians.”

As one of the youngest and fastest-growing states in the nation, Utah’s “political landscape is rapidly evolving, and it could eventually become the next purple state, Finlayson said. 

“Millennials and Gen-Z voters, who overwhelmingly prefer Democrats, are already shifting the state’s dynamics,” she said. “With today’s ruling, Utah’s political future will be more balanced and competitive. Watch out, Utah is about to become a battleground state.”

‘One of the worst outcomes’ that creates ‘chaos,’ Republican legislative leaders say

Utah’s legislative leaders, however, were incensed by the ruling, going as far to say it opens the door for California-style politics in the Beehive State. 

“This is one of the worst outcomes we’ve ever seen from the Utah Supreme Court,” House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, and Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, said in a joint statement. “Rather than reaching the self-evident answer, today the Court punted and made a new law about the initiative power, creating chaos and striking at the very heart of our republic.” 

Throughout the redistricting process Republican legislative leaders argued it was within their constitutional authority to change ballot initiatives and ultimately adopt its own version of maps. However, the Utah Supreme Court opinion states there are limitations to that authority. 

“Although the Legislature has authority to amend or repeal statutes, it is well settled that legislative action cannot unduly infringe or restrain the exercise of constitutional rights,” Petersen wrote. “Consequently, when Utahns exercise their right to reform the government through an initiative, this limits the Legislature’s authority to amend or repeal the initiative.”

Schultz and Adams said Utah has “been recognized as the best-managed state in the nation, with a strong spirit of collaboration known for solving tough issues for the citizens of the state.” They argued the ruling will have “profound and lasting ripple consequences that could negatively impact the state’s future.” 

“It mirrors how states like California are governed — by big money and outside interest groups that run initiatives to alter the government and push their own agendas,” Schultz and Adams said. “The Utah Supreme Court has gone a step further by creating ‘supreme laws’ that could be tied up in lengthy disputes for years. This decision strips away the ability of state, county and municipal authorities to enact policies and expose them to prolonged legal battles.” 

As the court case progresses, Adams and Schultz said, they believe the “Utah Constitution’s text shows that the Legislature should ultimately prevail.”

“Despite this inaccurate interpretation,” they said of the Utah Supreme Court’s ruling, “we remain committed to crafting policies that strengthen statutes and protect Utahns.” 

Sen. Scott Sandall, R-Tremonton, who co-chaired the Legislature’s Redistricting Committee in 2021, issued a similar statement expressing his disappointment in the ruling.

“In this case, the parties devoted extensive time and resources to briefing and arguing questions about the Legislature’s constitutional power to redistrict,” Sandall said. “The Utah Supreme Court failed to address the heart of that critical constitutional question. Instead, the decision goes beyond redistricting, raising grave concerns and uncertainty in the legislative process.”

Sandall defended the legislative process, saying elected officials “meticulously deliberate policies” and use public feedback to “ensure stability and accountability in governance.” He argued it already allows “every Utahn to engage.”

“I firmly believe the best policy solutions come from the elected officials, who are held accountable by the public every two to four years,” he said. “I remain steadfast in my commitment to uphold our republic’s principles and to fight for fairness and representation in our state’s governance.”

A more tempered reaction from the governor

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican who signed off on the Legislature’s 2021 maps despite calls to veto them, issued a much more tempered statement.

“While I disagree with some of the Court’s analysis and determinations, I respect the role of the Court in our system of government,” he said. “Ultimately, what matters is that we craft policy that keeps Utah the No. 1 state in the nation to work, live and raise a family. We look forward to continuing Utah’s pattern of careful and deliberate policy making with the best interests of Utahns as the top priority.” 

Cox, in 2021, acknowledged there was “certainly a partisan bend” in the redistricting process, the Deseret News reported, but he said he wouldn’t veto the maps because he’s not a “bomb thrower” and that the Legislature was “fully within their rights” to draw Utah’s future political districts. 

“If you have to divide counties, Republicans are always going to divide counties with lots of Democrats in them,” Cox said during a live Facebook town hall at the time. “And Democrats are always going to divide counties with lots of Republicans in them. It’s happening all across the country.”

Utah House Democratic leaders issued a statement applauding the ruling while urging the district court to “thoroughly examine the issues at hand and promptly resolve the case before the next election cycle.”

“This timely action is crucial to prevent prolonged uncertainty and to uphold the integrity and public confidence in our democratic election process,” House Democrats said. “As we await further developments, we reaffirm our commitment to advocating for a redistricting process that maintains the integrity of our elections and respects the rights of all voters.”

Utah House Democratic leaders said they also “remain committed to honoring the will of the people” who passed Proposition 4, as well as working with others “to ensure a more inclusive and representative democracy where every vote counts, and every community is fairly represented.”

The post Utah Supreme Court hands big win to plaintiffs in anti-gerrymandering lawsuit appeared first on Utah News Dispatch.