As judge decides whether to close the redistricting case, could lawmakers just make a new map?

SALT LAKE CITY — The judge overseeing the lawsuit over Utah’s redistricting process is expected to issue a ruling before Christmas on whether to grant the legislature’s request to close the case, sending it to the Utah Supreme Court.

Lawyers for the Utah State Legislature have urged 3rd District Court Judge Dianna Gibson to issue a final ruling, clearing their path for an appeal. They argued that the case effectively wrapped up once the judge issued a series of rulings on the legality of Proposition 4 and chose a new map for Utah’s congressional districts.

The League of Women Voters of Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government basically got what they wanted, argued Frank Chang, an attorney for the Utah State Legislature.

“What if I told you I disagree?” Judge Gibson said to him in the midst of arguments, asking for case law that even allows a case to be closed so abruptly.

During a hastily called hearing on Monday, lawyers for the League and MWEG urged the judge to reject the request. They argued that the case is far from over with claims yet to be addressed and the legislature failed to seek the proper interlocutory appeals when the time was appropriate. The injunctions she entered on Prop. 4 and the new map are preliminary, they argued, and the legislature passed new bills rewriting some of the rules of redistricting, which keeps the case alive.

When Judge Gibson asked if the legislature was essentially right that the case is basically over with the 2026 election? The plaintiffs suggested lawmakers might still bypass the courts and pass a new map in the upcoming legislative session.

“That is sort of a question mark I have in light of some statements, the public statements that have been made by certain legislators,” said Mark Gaber, an attorney for the plaintiffs. “Sen. Weiler, on his podcast, suggested the legislature could pass a new map for the 2026 election if a permanent injunction had been entered. That’s a question I have: if it’s intended by the legislature. If that’s the case? Remedial proceedings could certainly not be done as there would need to be a proceeding as to that new map.”

When Judge Gibson asked Chang about it, he said it was what “one member said in a podcast.”

“If this court is seeking to find out what the intent of the legislature is, it’s the act of the legislature. The most recent one here was what the legislature did in the special session,” he said.

In that special session, lawmakers voted to move the deadline for congressional candidate filings to March and pass a resolution condemning Judge Gibson’s ruling.

As the court hearing as going on, FOX 13 News texted Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, about his remarks. Sen. Weiler (who is an attorney in his day job), replied that he was explaining to listeners the difference between interlocutory and final appeals and just stating “hypotheticals” in response to any stay issued by the Utah Supreme Court.

“But I’m not aware of any plans to do that,” he wrote.

In 2018, voters approved Prop. 4, which created an independent redistricting commission to draw lines for boundaries in congress, legislature and state school board. When the legislature overrode the citizen ballot initiative and passed its own maps, the League and MWEG sued arguing that the people have a right to alter and reform their government. In particular, they alleged the congressional map that the Utah State Legislature approved was gerrymandered to favor Republicans.

The court sided with them, ruling that Prop. 4 is law and throwing out the congressional map. She ordered lawmakers to redraw a new one. They did, under protest, but she rejected their map for not meeting Prop. 4’s neutral redistricting criteria. Instead, she chose a map submitted by the plaintiffs that she declared met the tenets of Prop. 4. It has resulted in a Salt Lake County-centric district that Democratic candidates have rushed to enter, viewing it as more competitive for them.

The Utah State Legislature has argued that it has the sole constitutional right to draw boundaries in redistricting, setting up a legal showdown that will go to the Utah Supreme Court and potentially the U.S. Supreme Court.

Judge Gibson said she planned to issue a ruling before Christmas on whether to finalize the case.