A panel of three federal judges unanimously rejected the latest — and potentially last — attempt by Republican officials to block a court-ordered congressional map from being used in the November midterm elections.
The federal court decision comes on the heels of Friday’s similar unanimous refusal by the Utah Supreme Court to intervene in the case.
With Lt. Gov Deidre Henderson saying Monday is the deadline to have a map in place – and unless a federal appeals court grants an emergency reprieve — Republican lawmakers may have run out of options to halt the use of a court-ordered congressional map that could cost the GOP one of their four seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.
House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said there are discussions about once again postponing the candidate filing deadline to buy more time for further appeals.
Senate President J. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, said he “definitely” would like to see the challenge — brought by the Republican U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens and Celeste Maloy, along with a number of other GOP elected officials — sent to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The lawyers for Owens and Maloy could petition for an emergency stay that would be considered by Justice Neil Gorsuch, who presides over the 10th Circuit.
“We just keep going. We’re not going to quit. This is a big deal,” Adams said Monday. “Hopefully, we’ll be successful if they appeal to the United States Supreme Court.”
Schultz, however, seemed more resigned that the court challenges may have reached their end for the 2026 cycle.
“Ultimately, it’s going to affect an election, and that’s disappointing for the citizens of the state that one judge made that decision,” he said.
The federal judges ruled that the challenge by Owens and Maloy came too close to the start of the primary season for the court to disrupt the system.
With just three weeks until the party caucuses, where delegates to the party nominating conventions are chosen, ditching the map imposed by 3rd District Judge Dianna Gibson and returning to the map Republican lawmakers drew in 2021 would cause confusion and chaos for candidates and voters, U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby wrote for the panel.
“This right is fundamental. This right is central to our representative democracy,” he wrote of voting. “And the ability to exercise this right is endangered if the administrative machinery that makes elections run is damaged by last minute tinkering.”
Judge Timothy Tymkovich, a 10th Circuit appeals court judge who sat on the panel, disagreed that the proximity to the election should prevent the court from intervening, but agreed that Gibson had no choice but to choose a map because of the looming election deadlines and federal law that requires a map to be in place.
Tymkovich did express “reservations” about delays in Gibson’s ruling that “created timing and remedy issues that otherwise might not exist,” as well as choosing a map that was submitted by attorneys for the League of Women Voters and Mormon Women for Ethical Government, who were challenging the Legislature’s map.
That decision, he wrote, “raises doubts about the fairness of the process. None of this need have happened.”
With the federal court leaving Gibson’s map in place, it appears to mark the end of four years of litigation stemming from the passage of Proposition 4 — the 2018 voter-passed initiative that created an independent redistricting commission, established neutral criteria for setting political boundaries and prohibited manipulating the districts to favor one party over the other.
The Legislature largely gutted the initiative and adopted districts in 2021 that created four safe Republican seats. A group of voters, along with the League of Women Voters and Mormon Women for Ethical Government, sued, arguing undoing Proposition 4 effectively stripped voters of their constitutional right to the initiative process.
The Utah Supreme Court unanimously agreed in 2024 and sent the case back to Gibson. In a ruling last summer, she found that “Proposition 4 is the law in Utah,” and, because the Legislature’s congressional map did not comply with the law, the boundaries had to be redrawn.
The Legislature’s second attempt also failed to meet the law’s guidelines, Gibson ruled, and she chose a map submitted by the plaintiffs with the Salt Lake County-centered district that favors Democrats by as much as 17 percentage points.
Republican legislators were furious, and last December passed a resolution condemning both the Supreme Court and Gibson for judicial activism. They asked the Supreme Court to set aside Gibson’s chosen map, but the court rejected that appeal on Friday.
Proponents of Proposition 4 celebrated the judges’ decision Monday
“This federal lawsuit sought to undo a lawful, court–ordered congressional map. The court’s decision to reject that effort is an important affirmation that the rule of law matters,“ said Emma Petty Addams, co-executive director of Mormon Women for Ethical Government. ”Utah voters deserve fair representation, and this victory is about protecting those voters, not politicians."
Elizabeth Rasmussen, executive director of Better Boundaries, said, “This decision provides greater certainty that power is derived from the people.”
“Utahns can now prepare for future elections and the opportunity to have their voices heard,” she added.
This story is breaking and may be updated.