Legislative leaders and Gov. Spencer Cox are launching an investigation into allegations that Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen had an inappropriate relationship with a lawyer in the redistricting case — claims the bipartisan Judicial Conduct Commission investigated and found to be “speculative, overstated, and misleading” and had “very little credibility.”

In a joint statement, Cox, House Speaker Mike Schultz and Senate President J. Stuart Adams said the conduct commission’s investigation “left important questions unresolved.”

“Allegations of this nature, especially involving public officials, must be examined with transparency and accountability to establish the facts and to maintain public confidence,” they said. “We will move forward with an independent investigation to ensure the facts are fully examined. This process will be conducted objectively and thoroughly, because maintaining trust in our institutions is essential.”

The investigation comes as the Legislature suffers from a string of defeats in the courts and efforts by the Republican-led body to rein in what they call judicial activism. Earlier this year, GOP lawmakers and Cox added two justices to the Supreme Court, created a new court to hear challenges to government actions and enacted other reforms targeting the courts.

A complaint was filed with the Judicial Conduct Commission and with Chief Justice Matthew Durrant late last year by Michael Worley, an attorney who alleged he had heard from Hagen’s ex-husband, Tobin Hagen, who claimed to have found what he told investigators were “very flirtatious” text messages between the justice and attorney Dave Reymann, who represented the plaintiffs in Utah’s congressional redistricting lawsuit.

In his complaint, Worley forwarded Tobin Hagen’s assertions of an extramarital affair, but he acknowledged he did not have first-hand knowledge or evidence to support the allegation.

Hagen, in a sworn affidavit to the commission, said she and Reymann met in 1999 when they joined the same law firm, but rarely interacted once she became a judge. In November 2024, the Hagens attended a party at Reymann’s house and the following month they sat near each other at a Salt Lake County Bar Association holiday event.

Her last involvement in the redistricting case was Oct. 24, 2024, when she authored the unanimous opinion for the court voiding the Legislature’s proposed Amendment D, which, if approved by voters, would have given lawmakers the power to repeal voter-passed ballot initiatives. The justices said the ballot language was misleading and would have deceived voters into supporting the amendment.

In March of 2025, Hagen said, she met Reymann one-on-one for the first time in years, a month before she and her husband separated. She filed for divorce that August and said she disclosed to her colleagues on the bench that her husband was accusing her of an affair to hurt her reputation.

In September of 2025, she recused herself from the Legislature’s appeal of the redistricting lawsuit. In December, she recused herself from another case involving Reymann’s clients.

Earlier this month, she recused herself from the latest battle in the redistricting fight — this one a challenge to the constitutionality of the new three-judge constitutional court to hear cases against the government.

The recusal notice stated that Hagen had been close with Reymann early in her career, as well as Cheylynn Hayman, the chair of the JCC, but didn’t warrant recusal. “But after renewing those friendships in early 2025, Justice Hagen chose to disqualify herself going forward from all cases in which Ms. Hayman or Mr. Reymann appear as counsel for a party,” the notice reads.

‘Never operated under a conflict of interest’

The preliminary investigation by the Judicial Conduct Commission determined there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations in the complaint and noted that the information her ex-husband provided to investigators “is drastically different than what is alleged in the complainant.”

“The allegations as presented in the complaint are speculative, overstated, and misleading. There is very little credibility to this complaint,” the report concluded.

The commission — consisting of two bipartisan members appointed by the House Speaker, two by the Senate President, three by the governor, two from the Utah State Bar and two judges appointed by the Supreme Court — voted to dismiss the charges.

Hayman, the chair of the JCC, recused herself from the matter.

The same month the report was concluded, Justice Hagen petitioned the court for a civil stalking injunction against her ex-husband, court records show, but it was denied.

KSL first reported the allegations Thursday, based on the statement from Cox and legislative leaders and the Judicial Conduct Commission’s report. Under Utah law, JCC investigative reports are explicitly confidential. The Salt Lake Tribune subsequently obtained a copy of the report through an open records request to the Utah House of Representatives.

On Friday, the Utah Supreme Court issued a statement that the JCC is the entity under the Utah Constitution tasked with investigating allegations of wrongdoing. The JCC did so and voted to dismiss the matter.

“Despite their protected status, records of the Judicial Conduct Commission were inappropriately released to the public,” the statement continues. “The inappropriate release of these materials prompted renewed questioning about allegations that were previously investigated and dismissed in accordance with the process established by the Utah Constitution.”

Justice Hagen said in a statement that she “never operated under a conflict of interest while performing my judicial duties.”

She said when her ex-husband’s allegations were made, she self-reported them to the JCC and submitted a sworn statement to the JCC, which reviewed the matter and dismissed the complaint. “I remain committed to upholding the highest standards of judicial ethics, integrity and impartiality,” she said.

Worley, who filed the complaint, told The Tribune he agrees with the Supreme Court statement on the matter.

“I filed the complaint, it went through the process,” he said Friday afternoon. People had access to information I was not aware of and the process has been completed.”

Hagen will be on the ballot for her judicial retention election in November and will need to get a majority support from voters in order to retain her spot on the high court.

Reymann said in a text message that “the allegations are false.”

In addition to suing the Legislature over the redistricting matter, Reymann is representing clients in lawsuits challenging a law removing books from schools, and other high-profile suits against the Legislature.

He also represents the Utah Media Coalition, which includes The Tribune and KSL. In November, The Tribune presented a “NewsMakers” award to Mormon Women for Ethical Government, the League of Women Voters of Utah and the law firm Parr Brown Gee & Loveless for their anti-gerrymandering efforts, and Reymann accepted the award on behalf of the law firm.

Nate Alder, co-founder of the group Co-Equal, a group of lawyers established to defend judicial independence, said the disclosure of confidential records is now driving a new investigation outside of the process established by the Constitution.

“This kind of politicization does not make our courts what Utahns need them to be: fair, independent and free from outside manipulation,” Alder said and urged lawmakers to respect the constitutional process in place “and consider carefully the long-term costs of this path for the courts and the Utahns who depend on them.”

In a statement, Democratic legislative leaders said the JCC was established to be impartial and confidential and they trust the process.

“Efforts by the Legislature to investigate a member of the judiciary raise significant concerns over the separation of powers,” the statement read. “This is part of a broader pattern of overstepping judicial independence and sets an incredibly dangerous precedent.”

Republican U.S. Rep. Blake Moore issued a statement supporting the GOP investigation. “Utahns must be able to trust that judges are making decisions based solely on the law, not personal relationships or outside influences,” he said.

Correction, 2:05 p.m. • The story has corrected the description of the justice’s relationships with Cheylynn Hayman and with Dave Reymann.

This story has also added a comment from Michael Worley.