The voters are winning.

CASE UPDATE: League of Women Voters of Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government, et al. v. Utah State Legislature, et al. 

"All political power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require."

We will try to keep you up-to-date on the case after this significant victory but keep in mind, redistricting is a moving target. Not only do we have to keep an eye on the legal case itself, but also on the Legislature and its multi-pronged efforts to deny citizen rights. 

What you should focus on is this: Proposition 4 is now the law of the land – no matter what the legislature does. The Utah Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the legislature unlawfully rescinded the law and replaced it with their own version – HB200. 

The legislature is trying to determine how it will comply with Prop 4 and of course, if it can delay and delay until it is too late for new maps to be in place for the 2026 election. 

The Latest:

On August 25, 2024, the Third District Court ruled that the Utah Legislature’s repeal of Proposition 4 was unconstitutional, and that the current gerrymandered congressional map cannot be used. The Court found that Prop 4 met all the requirements for a government reform initiative, and that by ignoring the people and repealing Prop 4, the Legislature violated the people’s constitutional right to alter or reform their government via ballot initiative. 

And because the current gerrymandered congressional map was the “fruit” of the Legislature’s unconstitutional repeal, the current congressional map was struck down. 

The district court’s ruling is an application of a unanimous decision by the Utah Supreme Court in July 2024. In that opinion, the Utah Supreme Court explained that the people’s right to alter or reform their government is a fundamental right under the Utah Constitution that the Legislature cannot simply ignore. The district court applied the reasoning of that opinion in the August 25 ruling. 

The district court explained in the opinion why this case is so important: “How district lines are drawn can either safeguard representation and ensure accountability by elected representatives or erode public trust, silence voices and weaken the rule of law. Redistricting is among the most critical responsibilities of our government because it ultimately defines how fully people’s voices are heard in the institutions that govern them.”

What’s Next:

The legislature will have an opportunity to pass a new map that complies with all the neutral requirements of Proposition 4, including the ban on partisan gerrymandering. If the Legislature’s new map still violates the law, the court will select a map to ensure there is a legal map in place for the 2026 election. 

The court has set a schedule for the new map to be in place:

• Sept. 25: The Legislature will publish its proposed map

• Sept. 26-Oct. 5: Public comment period

• Oct. 6: The Legislature will formally vote on its proposed map and submit it to the court. Plaintiffs will also submit any proposed map to the court. 

• Oct. 23-24: The court will hold an evidentiary hearing to evaluate the proposed maps, if necessary.

• Nov. 10: The Lieutenant Governor has identified this as the date by which a final map must be in place. 

Prop 4 is now the law when it comes to redistricting in Utah. So any map—whether passed and proposed by the Legislature or proposed by plaintiffs—must conform to Prop 4’s neutral criteria, including the ban on partisan gerrymandering. The court will exercise its authority and obligation under the law to evaluate the maps to ensure they comply with the law. 

“It would be tremendously unjust to allow an unconstitutional and unlawful map … to govern another election cycle when the people passed [Proposition 4] in 2018,” said Mark Gaber, one of our attorneys from Campaign Legal Center. “This has to be the point at which it stops.”

The Legislature’s Response:

The Legislature has an opportunity to pass a legal map and yet they have given indications that they may attempt to delay, which they have done throughout this case. In September 2024, the Legislature attempted to amend the constitution to allow them to ignore citizen initiatives, but the Utah Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the ballot language for the proposed Amendment D was unconstitutionally deceptive and failed to follow the publication requirements of the Utah Constitution. Since the district court struck down the current map, the Legislature has attempted to stay that ruling, which the court denied. On September 5, the Legislature asked the Utah Supreme Court to stay the ruling. 

The Legislature has raised a slew of arguments, most of which have been rejected many times already. When the people passed Prop 4 in 2018, they exercised the lawmaking authority that the Utah Constitution grants to the people. Prop 4 retains a role in redistricting for the Legislature and simply requires that any map, whether drawn by the Redistricting Commission, the Legislature, or anyone else, must follow fair and neutral criteria. The district judge and the Utah Supreme Court have faithfully followed the constitution and applied the law.

In denying the Legislature’s request for a stay, Third District Judge Dianna Gibson said:

"Utah has an opportunity to be different. While other states are currently redrawing their congressional plans to intentionally render some citizen votes meaningless, Utah could redesign its congressional plan with an intention to protect its citizens' right to vote and to ensure that each citizen's vote is meaningful."