Republican lawmakers voted Monday to strip Utah Supreme Court justices of the authority to pick their own chief justice, instead giving Gov. Spencer Cox a power that he previously said he had “no interest” in exercising.
The bill awaits the signature of the governor, who has said he now supports the legislation.
Cox changed his mind after lawmakers removed a requirement that the governor had to appoint — and the Senate confirm — the chief justice every four years. Cox vetoed that bill in March, arguing in a letter that it would make the chief justice beholden to the governor if he or she wanted to keep the job and could impair the impartiality of the court.
On the final night of the legislative session earlier this year, Cox told The Salt Lake Tribune in an interview, “I have no interest in appointing the chief justice. I didn’t ask for it. It was not something I wanted.”
Now, under a new version of the bill sponsored by Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, the chief justice would serve a single eight-year term and would not be eligible for reappointment. The justice could remain on the court and serve as an associate justice after their term as chief justice expires.
(Chris Samuels | The Salt Lake Tribune) Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, speaks on his bill, SB1011, during a special session of the Senate at the Capitol in Salt Lake City, Monday, Oct. 6, 2025.
Brammer called it a “compromise bill,” and on Monday it passed the Senate on a 22-7 party-line vote with little debate. The House approved the bill 58-15, with one Republican breaking ranks.
Sen. Daniel Thatcher, a former Republican who now is with the Utah Forward Party, said the judiciary is an independent branch of government and “part of the necessary tension of checks and balances that are required to a functioning republic and having oversight. … Maybe this doesn’t violate separation of powers, but it certainly makes me uncomfortable.”
In the House, Rep. Andrew Stoddard, D-Sandy, proposed an amendment that would also allow Supreme Court justices to appoint the House speaker and Senate president, attempting to illustrate his view that the bill violates the judiciary’s independence. It was voted down.
When the earlier version of the bill passed during the legislative session, it was widely seen as part of a broader effort to clamp down on the judiciary after justices issued a series of decisions blocking laws that had been passed by the Republican supermajority.
Justices upheld the pause on a law outlawing almost all abortions, limited the Legislature’s power to undo citizen-passed ballot initiatives and voided a proposed constitutional amendment that sought to undo the initiative ruling.
The initial proposal attracted pushback from some of the justices: Earlier this year, Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and Justice Paige Petersen criticized the bill, particularly the portion that would have required the chief justice to be reconfirmed every four years.
“That element [of the bill] is an attempt to exert influence and control over the chief justice,” Durrant said during a meeting of the Utah Judicial Council, the body that sets policy for the courts. “Now the chief justice is going to start thinking about the next confirmation hearing.”
Petersen said it was among the bills “trying to take judicial independence … and put it under legislative control” and that she would prefer they “kill this silly bill.”
“There’s absolutely no reason for you to be meddling in how we pick the chief justice,” she said. “You can. But it’s not broken. It’s working well, so don’t do it.”
Correction: Oct. 7, 9:40 a.m. • The story has been updated to reflect that the bill passed the full Legislature and is awaiting the governor’s signature.