Utah governor signs bill to add justices to state Supreme Court as redistricting appeals loom

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Utah Gov. Spencer Cox signed a bill Saturday that would expand the state Supreme Court from five justices to seven as frustration grew among Republican lawmakers over a series of defeats before the tribunal.

Republican advocates for the change argued that it would help improve the efficiency of the courts. But legal experts say that could backfire and set a dangerous precedent at a time of tensions between the branches of government. The state judiciary did not ask for more judges in the high court.

Democrats united in opposition to the bill called the timing questionable. Last week the Legislature asked the court to overturn a redistricting decision that gave Democrats a strong shot at picking up one of Utah’s four Republican-held congressional seats in the fall.

There could be new judges while the court decides the fate of congressional maps.

Because the bill received approval from more than two-thirds of legislators, it took effect immediately after the governor signed it, allowing him to bypass a several-month waiting period to begin adding judges.

In Utah, judges are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state senate. In many other states, judges are elected.

Most states have five or seven Supreme Court justices, but some have nine. Cox, a Republican, said the additions would put Utah in line with other states of its size. He denied the policy was politically motivated, noting that Republican governors and senators have made all the recent appointments.

Once he fills the new seats, Cox will appoint five of the seven justices.

Last month, Republican lawmakers stripped state Supreme Court justices of their right to choose their own chief justices and gave that power to the governor.

“Having seven sets of eyes reviewing the most complex and difficult issues facing our state is better than just five sets of eyes,” said House Majority Leader Casey Snyder, the bill’s Republican sponsor.

John Pearce, who recently retired as associate chief justice, said this month that he doubted the changes would make the court more efficient.

“The more comments you have to take into account, the longer the process takes,” Pierce said. “If what the Legislature hopes to do is speed up the work of the courts, it’s going to backfire.”

Two states — Arizona and Georgia — have added judges in the past decade after making similar arguments about efficiency.

In the years since Arizona expanded its court in 2016, many past and current judges said it made things less efficient because more people had to review opinions before they were published.

Arizona courts now issue slightly more judgments per year, while Georgia’s cases are slightly fewer than before.

Utah Chief Justice Matthew Durant told legislators on the opening day of the 2026 session that the court has “absolutely no backlog” and urged them to add judges to lower courts, where the need is greater. Bill sponsors responded by adding some lower court judges and clerks.

The Utah State Bar has expressed concern over the expansion and other proposals that undermine the independence of the judiciary. One of them is a bill that would create a new trial court with exclusive jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges. The proposal would limit the ability of other judges and courts to block potentially unconstitutional state laws with injunctions.

Republicans have also been collecting signatures to try to put on the November ballot something that would restore their ability to draw districts that deliberately vote in favor of a political party, a practice known as gerrymandering.

___

Lee reported from Santa Fe, New Mexico.