A judge rejected the Legislature’s request to pause her own directive for lawmakers to draw new congressional maps, saying time is short, but it would be an affront to the will of Utah voters to let the existing maps stay in place for the 2026 election.
Utah voters passed Proposition 4 — which sought to ban partisan gerrymandering — in 2018, and for two election cycles were subjected to congressional maps that were, Judge Dianna Gibson wrote in Tuesday’s decision, “enacted in disregard to Proposition 4 and in defiance of the will of the people of Utah.”
Voters are entitled to “a lawful congressional plan” that complies with Proposition 4, she said.
Granting the Legislature’s request to push pause on the court-ordered congressional remapping, Gibson wrote, “would be sanctioning the Legislature’s violation of the people’s constitutional right to reform their government through redistricting legislation.”
“It would sanction the wholesale repeal of Proposition 4 and would irreparably harm the people of Utah,” she wrote.
Gibson’s refusal to pause the redistricting process clears the way for the Legislature to go to the Utah Supreme Court and ask the justices to block Gibson’s order. Although that may be a long shot, as the state’s high court ruled unanimously last year that the Legislature overstepped when it repealed Proposition 4.
(Bethany Baker | The Salt Lake Tribune) Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson answers questions during a press conference on the last day of the legislative session at the Utah Capitol in Salt Lake City on Friday, March 7, 2025.
Gibson’s denial also means the process of redrawing boundaries will proceed.
And mapmakers will have a little breathing room in the race to redraw the four districts.
Lawyers for Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson told Gibson Tuesday that county clerks could be prepared for next year’s midterm election as long as they have new maps by Nov. 10. Previously, her office had said Nov. 1 was the deadline to have congressional boundaries in place.
The nine extra days may not seem like much, but Gibson and attorneys for the Legislature and the plaintiffs who challenged the old maps — resulting in them being thrown out by the judge — have been trying to cram the process of drawing and having new maps approved by the court into less than 10 weeks from Gibson’s order last week.
The parties tentatively agreed last Friday to a hearing on Oct. 23-24 over whether the new congressional boundaries submitted by the Legislature meet the criteria established in Proposition 4 — the Better Boundaries initiative, approved by voters in 2018, that bans maps drawn to give an advantage to one party and disadvantage another.
Lawyers will now try to agree on a timeline for other redrawing efforts that have to occur between now and then. For example, the Legislature has to allow 10 days of public input on its proposed map, meet in a special legislative session to adopt the maps, which then have to be signed by Gov. Spencer Cox.
Those new boundaries will then be submitted to the court, while the plaintiffs and members of the public will submit their own proposal, which will be scrutinized and arguments made over whether or not the maps comply with the law.
In the meantime, attorneys for the Legislature have asked Gibson to push pause on her ruling ordering them to draw the new maps so they can ask the Utah Supreme Court, and possibly the U.S. Supreme Court, to overturn her decision voiding the existing districts.
Last week, Gibson ruled that, based on a decision last year by the Utah Supreme Court, the Legislature violated voters’ constitutional right to make laws when they repealed Proposition 4.
That ballot measure created an independent redistricting commission and banned partisan gerrymandering, but the Legislature ignored the redistricting commission’s recommendations and split the Democratic vote in Salt Lake County, creating four safe Republican seats.
Because the repeal was unconstitutional, “Proposition 4 is the law in Utah,” Gibson wrote. And because the Legislature did not follow the redistricting standards set in the law, the maps they drew are invalid, and she prohibited them from being used in the 2026 midterm elections.
She gave lawmakers until Sept. 24 to adopt the new congressional boundaries and submit them to the court.
Gibson said Friday that Utah is ”kind of in uncharted territory. … There’s really not a roadmap for what we do next.” And it was up to the Legislature’s responsibility, not the court’s, to ensure lawful maps will be ready for the 2026 elections.
“This court recognizes the separation of powers,” she added. “I understand it’s not the court’s job. It’s the Legislature’s job.”
In her ruling Tuesday, Gibson wrote that, through the redistricting process, “Utah has an opportunity to be different.”
“While other states are currently redrawing their congressional maps to intentionally render some citizen votes meaningless, Utah could redesign its congressional plan with the intention to protect its citizens’ right to vote and to ensure that each citizen’s vote is meaningful.”