Utah’s Republican-controlled legislature is escalating its fight against the state’s anti-gerrymandering law after a series of court rulings threatened the congressional map that has long favored the GOP.

In the latest move, lawmakers passed a new rule over the weekend that blocks many voters from withdrawing their signatures from a petition that sought to repeal Proposition 4 ahead of a Monday deadline, undermining efforts by grassroots groups to preserve the reform. That could affect the result of the petition after some voters said they were misled by Republicans who asked them to sign.

The move comes as redistricting battles intensify across the US ahead of the midterm elections. Courts in several states are weighing lawsuits over congressional maps, while Donald Trump has urged Republican governors to redraw districts in ways that could strengthen GOP control of House seats.

On 25 August 2025, third district judge Dianna Gibson ruled that Utah lawmakers had unconstitutionally overridden Proposition 4, the 2018 voter-approved initiative that created an independent redistricting commission, set neutral mapping criteria and required greater transparency in the process.

Gibson sided with the League of Women Voters of Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government, striking down the state’s 2021 congressional maps and reinstating Proposition 4 as a binding law, which allows independent bodies to redraw the districts. The ruling aligned with public opinion as well, according to the conservative Sutherland Policy Institute, which found that 85% of registered Utah voters support involving an independent commission in redistricting.

Gerrymandering’s impact has been most severe in Salt Lake county, Utah’s youngest and most populous county, which heavily leans Democratic. The 2021 Republican-drawn maps split the county across all four districts, diluting urban Democratic votes and entrenching GOP dominance.

“Salt Lake county was chopped into pieces,” said Katharine Biele, president of the League of Women Voters of Utah. “This new map reunifies the county, so people there have a fair chance to be heard.” By consolidating the county into a single district, the revised map restored genuine electoral competition; it could also give Democrats a fair chance to win one of Utah’s four congressional seats in the midterm elections.

But the sense of optimism many in Salt Lake City felt in August has steadily faded as Republicans have passed layers of legislation aimed at weakening or repealing Proposition 4. After the district court ruling last year, Utah’s Republican leadership quickly rejected the decision. Some lawmakers even threatened to impeach Judge Gibson.

As it became clear that Proposition 4 could deliver an additional seat to Democrats, the fight drew national attention. Trump and JD Vance both weighed in, framing the dispute as part of a broader struggle over election rules, with Trump immediately taking to social media, calling the proposition “unconstitutional” and the judges part of the “Radical Left”.

“What’s really frustrating is seeing that instead of listening to the people, and to the courts who are trying to keep them in line, they’re just trying to change the rules,” said Elizabeth Rasmussen, executive director of Better Boundaries, an advocacy group that had been running an awareness effort urging petition signers to withdraw their signatures before the Republican’s latest legislation.

In late January, Utah Republicans passed legislation adding two seats to the state’s supreme court. The state’s governor, Spencer Cox, quickly signed the bill into law, expanding the court from five to seven justices. Critics argue the move amounts to court expansion aimed at blunting the impact of rulings related to Proposition 4.

“Disagreement with judicial decisions is normal,” Rasmussen said, referencing criticism from the Trump administration and frustration expressed by the governor. “But impeaching a judge because you lost is not. Trying to rewrite the rules after the fact is not. Court-packing is not how this system works.”

(The Guardian reached out to the Utah governor’s office for comment multiple times but had not received a response at the time of publication.)

In early February, with the deadline to file for re-election just over a month away, two Utah Republican members of Congress, representatives Celeste Maloy and Burgess Owens, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the state court’s order to reinstate the district court-approved map. They argued that the ruling violated the US constitution and asked the US district court for Utah to restore the map passed by the Republican-controlled legislature in 2021.

Later that month, a three-judge federal panel rejected the GOP-led effort to block the new House map. The judges denied Republicans’ request for a preliminary injunction, allowing the revised map to be used in this year’s election and giving Democratic candidates a potential opportunity to win a US House seat. (The Guardian reached out to the Utah GOP for comment in December but had not received a response as of publication.)

Biele, of the League of Women Voters of Utah, sharply criticized Republican lawmakers, calling the move an abuse of power. “Every time they lose, or get a ruling they don’t agree with, they change the rules so it works for them,” she said.

But in a final push to overturn Proposition 4, Utah Republicans announced last Monday that they had submitted enough verified signatures to qualify a repeal measure for the November ballot, with a deadline to verify on 9 March. Once verified, county clerks were expected to publish the names of signers, triggering a 45-day window during which voters could withdraw their signatures – a process later threatened by the weekend legislation to make it harder to do so.

Rasmussen, executive director of Better Boundaries, said the bill was pushed through with little public scrutiny. “This bill was obviously planned to pass as the clock ran out with very little public input,” she said. “It was introduced at 11pm on a Friday, the last night of the legislative session, and was signed into law only 12 hours later.” She added that the move reflects a broader problem.

“This type of legislative behavior is what happens when there aren’t any checks on power.”