A late night decision by 3rd District Judge Dianna Gibson has intensified Utah’s redistricting battle and placed the state’s judiciary at the center of a major political confrontation. Shortly before midnight on Monday, Gibson issued an order rejecting the congressional map created by the Republican controlled Legislature and replacing it with a map proposed by the plaintiffs in a long running anti gerrymandering lawsuit. The decision immediately produced a wave of criticism from GOP officials and prompted a state lawmaker to announce that he would pursue impeachment.
The ruling revisits the unresolved conflict that began after Utah voters narrowly passed Proposition 4 in 2018. The initiative established an independent, nonpartisan redistricting commission and included a ban on partisan gerrymandering. Despite the measure’s passage, lawmakers later curtailed the commission’s powers and substituted their own map after the 2020 Census. In her decision, Gibson wrote that “in 2018, Utahns exercised their fundamental constitutional right to alter or reform their government via an initiative that, among other things, banned partisan gerrymandering” and she found that legislators had “unconstitutionally impair[ed] Proposition 4’s reforms.”
Expert simulations submitted in the case showed that nonpartisan maps would regularly produce three Republican leaning districts and one Democratic leaning district. Instead, the Legislature drew four Republican dominated districts and again submitted maps during the court process that preserved that outcome. Gibson chose a map created by the plaintiffs, stating that “the public has an interest in proceeding with a congressional map in the 2026 election that complies with Proposition 4, not one that undermines the core reforms.”
Not long after the ruling became public, Rep. Matt MacPherson announced on social media that he had begun drafting impeachment documents. “I have opened a bill to file articles of impeachment against Judge Gibson for gross abuse of power, violating the separation of powers and failing to uphold her oath of office to the Utah Constitution,” he wrote. Utah law limits impeachment to “high crimes and misdemeanors or malfeasance in office,” making the proposal highly unusual in response to a judicial decision.
Republican leaders continued the criticism on Tuesday. Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz issued a statement that said, “Late last night, a single unelected judge set aside the Utah Constitution and the voice of Utah voters, selecting a map drawn behind closed doors by out of state advocacy groups.” They added that “the process the judge chose denied the people of Utah a chance to see it, to weigh in, or to be heard. The judge disregarded the Constitution to select a clearly gerrymandered map. This is not fair to Utahns and is deeply disappointing.”
Their argument focused on claims that the court backed a partisan map. Gibson’s ruling, however, concluded that the Legislature’s map “is an extreme partisan outlier more Republican than over 99 percent of expected maps drawn without political consideration.” The judge also found that the Legislature’s expert created a map with “partisan political data on display” in ways that violated the 2018 initiative.
Gov. Spencer Cox also disagreed with the decision and said, “The Utah Constitution clearly states that it is the responsibility of the Legislature to divide the state into congressional districts. While I respect the Court’s role in our system, no judge, and certainly no advocacy group, can usurp that constitutional authority.” Cox voiced support for an appeal but did not endorse impeachment. His office did not immediately clarify his position on that topic.
Several organizations and legal experts objected strongly to the impeachment talk. League of Women Voters Utah President Kathy Biele said, “This is unbelievable. She’s not doing anything that she shouldn’t do,” noting that the Utah Supreme Court had already directed the lower court to evaluate whether lawmakers violated the initiative process.
The Utah State Bar also issued a statement stating that it “strongly condemns any effort” to impeach Gibson “based on her recent ruling.” The organization wrote, “The judiciary must remain free from political pressure so all Utahns can have confidence in fair, impartial courts. Impeachment is reserved for serious misconduct, and disagreement should instead be addressed through the appeals process.”
Plaintiffs’ attorney David Reymann spoke outside the courthouse, saying, “Today is a day we should all be celebrating the vindication of the voters of Utah and the courage that courts show in the face of enormous political pressure.” Reymann added, “The whole reason the court was put in this position to try and put a new map in place is because the Legislature failed to do its job and enact a legally compliant map. Courts don’t do this by default. They do it when the Legislature doesn’t do its job.” He called the impeachment threat “irresponsible and unfortunate” and said he hoped lawmakers’ reactions were “merely the initial throes of disappointment.”
Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, whose office oversees elections, said she would begin implementing the court ordered map unless an appellate court intervenes. She explained, “The people of Utah deserve an orderly and fair election,” while noting that new district boundaries must be finalized before candidate filing begins in January. MacPherson replied to her statement by writing, “Maybe sleep on this before making irrational, unconstitutional decisions. Remember your oath as well.”
The Legislature has said it will pursue appeals to the Utah Supreme Court and potentially the United States Supreme Court. Whether those appeals can be resolved in time for the 2026 elections remains unclear, given that election officials emphasized that November 10 was the final date for setting district boundaries without jeopardizing the electoral calendar.
Meanwhile, a separate political effort is underway to repeal Proposition 4 entirely. The Utah Republican Party and the group Utahns for Representative Government are collecting signatures to place a repeal initiative on the 2026 ballot. That process requires 140,748 valid signatures distributed across 26 of the state’s 29 Senate districts.
Supporters of Proposition 4 expressed optimism that voters will defend the initiative. Elizabeth Rasmussen, executive director of Better Boundaries, said, “We trust the voters of Utah, that they will choose fairness. Of course, we have a fight ahead of us for next year. But right now, today, we’re just celebrating this win.”
Utah now faces the possibility of an extended struggle over judicial independence, citizen initiated reforms, and the structure of its congressional representation. The outcome of the appeals process, the impeachment talk, and the upcoming ballot campaign will determine whether Proposition 4’s promise of nonpartisan redistricting survives the political pressure now unfolding around the courts.
COMMENTS