Top GOP lawmakers looking to potentially expand Utah's Supreme Court
House Majority Leader Jefferson Moss, R-Saratoga Springs, said higher caseloads and court delays are behind the push to study expanding the court, but the move comes as GOP lawmakers are still smarting after the state's high court rebuked them last summer for altering a 2018 ballot initiative and allowed their abortion ban to remain on hold pending a legal challenge.
And it's not the only way legislators are seeking to rein in the power of the courts this legislative session.
Moss announced his intent to file legislation on the subject on the House floor Wednesday. The specifics of the proposal remain unclear, and a requested bill in Moss's name titled "Judicial Officer Modifications" has yet to be made public.
"Over the past decade, we have seen growing caseloads, delays and evolving legal complexities in Utah's highest court," Moss told KSL.com through a spokeswoman. "The Legislature has the ability to adjust the court's size in response to these growing demands. As such, I've opened a bill file to explore the potential of adjusting the number of justices on the Utah Supreme Court."
Utah's Supreme Court dates back to before statehood, when the Deseret Constitution established a three-member territorial court that convened in 1850, per the Utah Division of Archives and Records Service. The Utah Supreme Court was established in 1896 with three justices, and later expanded to include the five justices — one chief justice and four associate justices — which is still in place today.
The state Constitution requires that the court "shall consist of at least five justices," but gives lawmakers the power to change the number of justices through statute, "but no change shall have the effect of removing a justice from office."
Moss hasn't expressed support for expanding the court to a specific number of justices. The U.S. Supreme Court currently has nine members, while many states have between five and nine.
Some Democrats expressed an openness to expanding the federal Supreme Court during President Donald Trump's first term and following its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, but that openness met with accusations of trying to "pack the court" by many conservatives — including Utah Sen. Mike Lee, who wrote a book in defense of the current number: "Saving Nine: The Fight Against the Left's Audacious Plan to Pack the Supreme Court and Destroy American Liberty."
"If members of both parties do not step up and vigorously oppose this idea, they might just get away with it this time," Lee wrote in a 2023 Deseret News op-ed. "I am not exaggerating when I say that the future of our Constitution is at stake."
Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said it's time to begin discussing adding justices as Utah transitions to a "medium-sized" state in a meeting with reporters Thursday.
"I don't know why the courts would have an issue with increasing the size," he said. "I mean, you look at the workload and the amount of the complexity of the cases that are in front of them today, and I think more eyes on what they're looking at to help sort through some of these issues I think is a good idea."
But despite Utah's growing population, some are skeptical that adding justices will improve the efficiency with which the court hears and decides cases. In fact, it could have the opposite effect, according to Michael Zimmerman, a longtime litigator who served on the Utah Supreme Court from 1984 to 2000 and was its chief justice for four of those years. Zimmerman's firm has represented plaintiffs in several cases against the Legislature, but he has not been involved in those cases.
"I think that the court is not overburdened at the present time in terms of cases," he told KSL.com. "Sometimes, cases take a long time. There are always cases that get hung up within the court, and it takes time to get them ironed out among the justices."
"Adding more judges means that coming to a conclusion that can be supported by a majority will take you longer," he added. "So, I don't see any functional reason to think that expanding the court would do anything positive. ... I understand the Legislature may be frustrated with the time it takes cases to go up and down within the courts, but, you know, everybody gets frustrated with the time litigation takes."
In light of several recent rulings by the Utah courts against lawmakers — pausing the state's near-total abortion ban, temporarily blocking a ban on transgender athletes in high school sports, and saying the Legislature overreached by altering a 2018 ballot initiative on redistricting — the Legislature has considered several proposals that have been seen as efforts to get around rulings it doesn't like.
"In terms of justifying expanding the court because of 'evolving (complexities)' of the law, all I can think that means is that the legislator thinks that somehow the current members of the court — I just have to frankly say — (it) must mean that they don't agree with what the legislator would like them to be deciding," Zimmerman said. "The people on the court right now are very smart, very well educated. They were selected in an impartial process. Every one of them was picked by a Republican governor, and they're very, very capable people."
Asked about the bill shortly after it was announced Wednesday, Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, said he had heard a "rumor" of a proposal but declined to weigh in either way.
"It's an interesting bill file; we'll see if it has legs," he told reporters. "That's probably all I'm going to say."
While the issue of Utah's Supreme Court makeup isn't commonly discussed in state politics, Zimmerman made the case that the current system is an important check against government overreach and is designed to be a deliberate and sometimes slow process.
'People can be very impatient with the way the system's set up,' he said. 'An autocracy is very efficient. One person decides everything. It's also tremendously perilous for anybody that doesn't agree with the autocrat. ... In the United States, we've opted for fairness and process as a primary value.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
9 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Disgraced former US Rep. George Santos to begin serving his 7-year fraud sentence
NEW YORK — Disgraced former U.S. Rep. George Santos is expected to begin serving a seven-year prison sentence on Friday for the fraud charges that got him ousted from Congress. The New York Republican pleaded guilty last summer to federal wire fraud and aggravated identity theft charges for deceiving donors and stealing people's identities in order to fund his congressional campaign. He must report to federal prison before 2 p.m. It's unclear where he'll serve his time, though a federal judge has recommended that Santos be housed in a facility in the Northeast. Santos and his lawyers repeatedly declined to comment to The Associated Press, and the federal Bureau of Prisons said it doesn't discuss the status of inmates until they're officially in custody. In a Thursday interview with Al Arabiya, a Saudi state-owned news organization, Santos said he'll serve his sentence in a minimum-security prison 'camp' that he described as a 'big upgrade' from the medium-security lockup he was initially assigned to. The ever-online Santos, who turned 37 on Tuesday, also hosted a farewell party for himself on the social media platform X on Thursday night. 'Well, darlings…The curtain falls, the spotlight dims, and the rhinestones are packed,' he wrote in a post afterwards. 'From the halls of Congress to the chaos of cable news what a ride it's been! Was it messy? Always. Glamorous? Occasionally. Honest? I tried… most days.' In April, a federal judge declined to give Santos a lighter two-year sentence that he sought, saying she was unconvinced he was truly remorseful. In the weeks before his sentencing, Santos said he was 'profoundly sorry' for his crimes, but he also complained frequently that he was a victim of a political witch hunt and prosecutorial overreach. Santos was elected in 2022, flipping a wealthy district representing parts of Queens and Long Island for the GOP. But he served for less than a year and became just the sixth member of the House to be ousted by colleagues after it was revealed he had fabricated much of his life story. During his winning campaign, Santos painted himself as a successful business owner who worked at prestigious Wall Street firms when, in reality, he was struggling financially. He also falsely claimed to have been a volleyball star at a college he never attended and referred to himself as 'a proud American Jew' before insisting he meant that he was 'Jew-ish' because his Brazilian mother's family had a Jewish background. The cascade of lies eventually led to congressional and criminal inquiries into how Santos funded his campaign and, ultimately, his political downfall. Since his ouster from Congress, Santos has been making a living hosting a podcast called 'Pants on Fire with George Santos' and hawking personalized video messages on Cameo. He has also been holding out hope that his unwavering support for President Donald Trump might help him win a last-minute reprieve. The White House said this week that it 'will not comment on the existence or nonexistence' of any clemency request. In media appearances this month, the former lawmaker wasn't shy about sharing his morbid fears about life behind bars. 'I'm not trying to be overdramatic here. I'm just being honest with you. I look at this as practically a death sentence,' Santos told Tucker Carlson during an interview. 'I'm not built for this.' On social media, his recent musings have sometimes taken a dark turn. 'I'm heading to prison, folks and I need you to hear this loud and clear: I'm not suicidal. I'm not depressed. I have no intentions of harming myself, and I will not willingly engage in any sexual activity while I'm in there,' he said on X. 'If anything comes out suggesting otherwise, consider it a lie … full stop.'
Chicago Tribune
9 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
President Donald Trump wants to play global peacemaker. Derailed Gaza ceasefire shows how daunting that ambition is
WASHINGTON — The United States cutting short Gaza ceasefire talks this week plunges one of President Donald Trump's pushes to solve global conflicts into new uncertainty. The derailing of talks to solve the 21-month Israel-Hamas war is the latest blow to Trump as several of his efforts to broker agreements for fraught conflicts and complex global threats have stalled. Though the Republican president has only been back in office for six months, he has sought to be known as a peacemaker. In some cases, he has set ambitious goals that have fallen short, like a promise to end the still-ongoing war in Ukraine before he took office. Trump has said he's seeking the deals to stop destruction and loss of life. But he has also been open about his ambition to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, prompting some of those seeking to cultivate favor with Trump to nominate him for the prestigious recognition. Here's a look at where some of Trump's efforts to strike peace and security deals stand. STATUS: No major breakthroughs in recent talks. THE BACKSTORY: Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff said Thursday that the U.S. was bringing home its negotiating team from Qatar, where talks were ongoing, to assess its next steps. Witkoff said the move was made because Hamas was not showing 'good faith' toward reaching a ceasefire, but U.S. officials did not offer specifics. No major breakthroughs have occurred despite weeks of talks in Qatar, along with a visit early this month to the White House by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Witkoff said the U.S. would 'consider alternative options to bring the hostages home,' but U.S. officials did not answer questions about what those options could include. When asked about next steps on Friday, Trump told reporters that Hamas didn't want to make a deal and said, 'I think what's going to happen is they're going to be hunted down.' STATUS: War still going on. THE BACKSTORY: Before he returned to office, Trump repeatedly said he would solve the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours — and even before he was sworn in as president. That didn't happen, and both sides remain far apart on reaching an agreement. Trump has become increasingly critical of President Vladimir Putin in recent months and is losing patience with his continued offensive in Ukraine. But Trump has resisted backing a bipartisan U.S. bill to impose steep sanctions on Russia, instead giving Russia 50 days to accept a peace deal or face sanctions on its energy exports. The delay has given Russia a window to continue a stepped-up offensive in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy this week reiterated his willingness to meet face-to-face with Putin to end the conflict. Russia has rejected the offer, saying the countries are too far apart. Lower-level Ukrainian and Russian officials met Wednesday for talks in Istanbul, but no breakthroughs were announced. Putin has said any peace deal should include Ukraine withdrawing from the four regions that Russia illegally annexed in September 2022 but did not fully capture. He also wants Ukraine to renounce its bid to join NATO and accept limits on its military. Ukraine and its Western allies have rejected those terms. STATUS: Open conflict ended for the moment. Many unanswered questions remain. THE BACKSTORY: Trump was able to broker a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran after the U.S. joined Israel in launching strikes on Iran's nuclear program. But the status of Iran's nuclear program is another unanswered question for the Trump administration. While the recent U.S. and Israeli strikes dealt a blow to Iran's nuclear capacities, the United States has still not struck an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program. An Iranian diplomat said Wednesday that his country was ready to engage in talks on its nuclear program with the United States, but only after Washington takes meaningful steps to rebuild trust. Meanwhile, Iran has opened the door to a separate yet related negotiation track with Britain, France and Germany, three of the remaining members of a 2015 nuclear deal, which Trump withdrew the United States from in his first term. Foreign ministers from the four countries met in Istanbul on Friday to discuss European threats to reimpose sanctions on Iran if there is no progress on a deal to limit its nuclear program by August. While deals in some of the most pressing conflicts have remained elusive to Trump, he has helped to broker agreements in the months he's been back in office. RWANDA-DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO: In June, he invited leaders from Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo to the White House to sign an agreement seen as a major step toward peace after decades of conflict. The U.S.-brokered deal emphasizes the two neighboring countries' sovereignty and territorial integrity and includes a commitment to end hostilities and backing of armed groups. The deal also helps the U.S. government and American companies gain access to critical minerals in the region. INDIA-PAKISTAN: In May, when a series of military strikes brought longtime nuclear adversaries India and Pakistan closer to war, Trump's administration intervened. The nations agreed to stop fighting after the U.S.-led talks, and Trump said he would work to provide a 'solution' to the long-running dispute over the Indian-controlled Kashmir region. The ceasefire has held, but it's not clear what progress has been made on any long-term agreement. Last month, Trump had lunch at the White House with Asim Munir, Pakistan's army chief. SYRIA-ISRAEL: Earlier this month, after Israel intervened in fighting between Syrian government forces and rival armed groups, Trump's special envoy to Syria, Tom Barrack, announced a limited ceasefire agreement between Israel and Syria. Barrack, who's also the U.S. ambassador to Turkey, said he met in Paris on Thursday with representatives from both countries to discuss de-escalation. Barrack said on social media that 'we accomplished precisely that' and that both sides committed to continuing the effort. Israel's intervention, however, caught Trump off guard and stymied his administration's push to get both countries to reach a full normalization of diplomatic relations.
The Hill
9 minutes ago
- The Hill
Ethics panel directs Ocasio-Cortez to make more payments for Met Gala ‘Tax the Rich' outfit
The House Ethics Committee has directed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to make around $3,000 in additional payments in relation to her attendance at the 2021 Met Gala and the iconic 'Tax the Rich' dress she wore there, saying it would consider the matter of her Met Gala attendance closed after those payments. Ocasio-Cortez had already made payments to account for the rental cost of the dress and accessories in 2022, but in a report released publicly on Friday, the Ethics Committee found the estimated rental cost to be 'unrealistic' and below market value, amounting to an impermissible gift not in compliance with federal law and House rules — even though it said the violations were not 'knowing and willful.' Ocasio-Cortez is expected to pay the difference, which would bring an end to the years-long investigation into her Met Gala attendance. While Ocasio-Cortez previously paid $990.76 for the cost of renting her Met Gala ensemble from designer Brother Vellies, the committee found that the designer's accountant previously 'vastly undervalued the apparel,' and found $3,724.04 to be closer to fair market value for the rental — saying it would be 'appropriate' for her to repay an additional $2,733.28 to comply with the Gift Rule. The Ethics Committee also found that Ocasio-Cortez should donate the $250 cost of her now-fiance's meal at the gala to the Met's Costume Institute. The panel noted that Ocasio-Cortez made 'significant steps' to comply with House gift rules, and that her attendance at the event otherwise complied with House rules. 'The Congresswoman appreciates the Committee finding that she made efforts to ensure her compliance with House Rules and sought to act consistently with her ethical requirements as a Member of the House,' Mike Casca, Ocasio-Cortez's chief of staff, said in a statement. 'She accepts the ruling and will remedy the remaining amounts, as she's done at each step in this process.' Ocasio-Cortez separately previously paid for the cost of makeup, hotel rooms, transportation, and other 'similar benefits' in connection with attending the Met Gala, totaling around $7,500. With the new costs directed by the committee, Ocasio-Cortez will have personally paid over $10,000 for the Met Gala evening, her counsel told the Ethics Committee. 'It would be nonsensical to suggest that the Congresswoman should have been prepared to pay for aspects of items and services that she didn't know about and didn't authorize,' her counsel said in a May 2025 letter. The Ethics Committee first released a report from the Office of Congressional Ethics — now called the Office of Congressional Conduct — in 2023 that scrutinized Ocasio-Cortez's Met Gala attendance and suggested she may have accepted impermissible gifts related to the event. That report showed frustration from some vendors about payments for hair and makeup services for the event being delayed for months, as well as payments for her Met Gala ensemble and other associated costs being paid months later. After further investigation, the Ethics Committee determined that the delay in making payments was not intentional and Ocasio-Cortez was not personally aware of the extent of the delays. But the panel also determined that Ocasio-Cortez's payments for her outfit were below market value, and that efforts to estimate the cost 'failed to account for the true cost of such unique goods, particularly considering that they were custom-made for the congresswoman and likely had no further use after the event.' And it dinged Ocasio-Cortez's team for bringing up the mass-market clothing rental service Rent the Runway as a data point when assessing costs associated with renting a Met Gala outfit, as a Brother Vellies accountant testified and a publicist testified. 'The comparison of a one-of-a-kind, custom-made designer gown to those sold commercially and rented to numerous individuals on Rent the Runway is simply inapposite,' the Ethics Committee said. Ocasio-Cortez's counsel told the panel in 2024 that Rent the Runway was brought up only when estimating if the congresswoman could afford to attend the event, and that the congresswoman did not direct others to use those estimations to influence the cost of a rental. The panel estimated that cost of goods to create the dress was $6,279.10 rather than $1,000 — making the 'true retail value of the gown designed for Representative Ocasio-Cortez was likely approximately $18,837.30, and $2,976.29 would be a more reasonable fair market value for rental of the gown' rather than It also said the invoice provided by Brother Vellies did not account for a custom flower hairpiece that Ocasio-Cortez wore, and that Ocasio-Cortez should pay $36.71 to account for the rental of that hairpiece. The panel found previous invoices of $160 for rental of shoes, $170 for rental of a handbag, and $78.47 for rental of jewelry to be permissible.
