A year of changes to the Utah judicial branch has raised controversy among some Utahns regarding the balance of powers in our state government.
Senate Bill 134 expanded the Utah Supreme Court from five to seven justices, expanded the Court of Appeals justices from seven to nine and added a district court judge to three judicial districts.
With the approval of Republican Gov. Spencer Cox, the Republican-led Legislature passed this law in January. Lawmakers claim it was necessary to make the court more efficient and address its heavy caseload with a growing Utah population.
Critics say the Republican legislators are motivated by dissatisfaction with the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of the League of Women Voters of Utah. The case was decided by the court in 2024 after the league sued the state for altering a redistricting initiative brought to the Legislature by the people. The voting rights group sought to reduce partisan gerrymandering, the changing of voter boundaries in favor on a certain political party.
“It upset the legislature. It upset the governor. And so they decided, what can we do?” Katharine Biele, president of the League of Women Voters of Utah, said.
Biele sees the expansion of the Utah Supreme Court as a politically motivated reaction to the court’s decision, and she is not alone.
The sponsors of this legislation, including Wilson, said that these court expansions to the district courts will bring a real benefit. While critics argue that the expansions to the appellate courts serve the legislators rather than everyday Utahns.
Differing messages from the Legislature and the Judiciary
In the January 2026 State of the Judiciary address, then-Chief Justice Matthew Durrant, noted the Supreme Court caseload was “normal” and explained, “we essentially have no backlog.” He then emphasized the need for more resources in the state’s trial courts.
Tyler Young, president of the Utah State Bar, explained the pressing need for additional resources in the lower Utah courts. He cited Utah’s Fourth Judicial District, which includes the city of Provo, where the caseload is at roughly 130% of the recommended limit.
“Judges, I think, feel personally they’re overworked and overstressed in terms of the time that it’s taking them to render decisions on very important cases in people’s lives,” Young said.
The law added three judges to district trial courts in need, but legal observers like Young, say more is needed.
Despite these concerns, legislators like Sen. Chris Wilson (who sponsored the bill) maintain all these laws and changes will benefit Utahns.
“This is about more than adding judges and justices,” Wilson said. “As Utah continues to grow, we need to make sure our courts have the people and resources they need to handle increasingly complex cases and effectively serve the Utahns who rely on them.”
The three-judge panel
While SB 134 added judges and justices, House Bill 392 was passed earlier this year to also change Utah court structure. This bill created a three-judge panel to hear constitutional disputes — a power and responsibility of supreme courts in every state. This panel would be made up of randomly selected district judges.
Three lawsuits claim this panel — which is designed to judge constitutional issues — is unconstitutional and another attempt of the Legislature to weaken the judicial branch. The plaintiffs are the League of Women Voters of Utah, Planned Parenthood Association of Utah and Utah teenagers concerned with fossil fuel development.
On Oct. 5, the plaintiffs’ attorneys presented oral arguments to the Utah Supreme Court regarding the three-judge panel.
The Supreme Court's ruling on the three-judge panel is pending.
On the November ballot
The Utah State Legislature passed a proposal during the 2025 legislative general session to ammend the state constitution.
Amendment B, which is on the November ballot, would require citizen initiatives with tax implications to receive a 60% vote from citizens to be put into law, as opposed to a simple majority vote, more than half.
“We are a majoritarian country and a majoritarian state. We do not normally require 60%,” Biele said.
Legal observers say taxes may not be the true motivation of the amendment and question why the legislators can pass a law with a simple majority, but citizens’ initiatives require more. Some view this amendment as another legislative overreach in this year of major changes.
The Daily Universe recently published an article regarding Amendment B, you can read it here.
Ending the transformative period
The Utah Supreme Court looks very different than it did in January. In addition to the two new seats created in January, the May resignation of Justice Diana Hagen, and the August retirement of Chief Justice Matthew Durrant, have created two more vacancies. With those appointments complete, four new male justices have joined the bench this year.
Observers’ concerns go beyond political affiliations and legislative frustration as some disapprove of the now male-led court. For some observers, the court’s rapid shift from a female majority to a bench of five men and two women raises concerns of sexism.
Others have criticized the lack of prior bench experience of Justice Jay T. Jorgensen, an appointee of Cox, and the exclusively white court has also raised concerns about misrepresenting Utah’s demographics.
But where many see worrisome political contention, others see no such alarm. BYU law professor Thomas R. Lee views this transformation and the tension between the branches of government as nothing to be concerned about.
“Part of what seems to be going on is just a natural product of our system of separated powers. It's some pushback from the legislative branch and the executive branch against the judiciary, exercising the powers that they have,” Lee said. “One of the powers they have is to decide on the number of justices that hold office on the Utah Supreme Court.”
2026 marks a transformative and controversial year in Utah judicial history and Utahns await the Supreme Court's decision on the three-judge panel and the results of this year's midterm elections.