Utah Supreme Court: Lawmakers must heed voter-passed gerrymandering reforms
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Maura Losch/Axios
Utah legislators cannot ignore the state's voter-approved anti-gerrymandering ballot initiative in drawing electoral maps, the state Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday.
Why it matters: The decision could lead to new congressional district boundaries and ultimately change the makeup of Utah's all-Republican congressional delegation.
Catch up quick: Voters in 2018 narrowly approved the "Better Boundaries" ballot initiative, which created a seven-member independent redistricting commission to draw new congressional boundaries and avoid gerrymandering.
Yes, but: The GOP-controlled Utah Legislature in 2020 revised the voter-approved law to make the commission merely advisory. Lawmakers in 2021 rejected the commission's maps and drew new ones that split blue-leaning Salt Lake County into four congressional districts.
- They argued the Utah Constitution authorizes them to "amend or repeal" statutes, including ballot initiatives — and that it gives them authority over voting districts, specifically.
Driving the news: The court on Thursday ruled that "government-reform initiatives are constitutionally protected from unfettered legislative amendment, repeal, or replacement."
- Ballot initiatives are protected by a provision in the state constitution that gives citizens the right to "alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require," Justice Paige Petersen wrote in the decision.
- The ruling sides with the League of Women Voters of Utah and other plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit last year accusing state lawmakers of diluting Democratic votes in the state's most populous county.
The fine print: The court clarified that lawmakers can amend government-reform ballot initiatives that voters pass — but the changes cannot "impair" the reform.
Caveat: The decision doesn't rule specifically on whether the legislature unconstitutionally impaired the Better Boundaries initiative when it threw out the commission's maps.
- That question goes back to the 3rd District Court.
The big picture: If the League of Women Voters wins that argument, "it is likely that the Congressional map cannot stand," Petersen wrote.
Zoom in: The Better Boundaries initiative bans partisan gerrymandering, Petersen noted, "so, if Plaintiffs can prove that the Congressional Map was influenced by partisan gerrymandering, that would render the Map invalid as well."
The intrigue: Utah's Republican Gov. Spencer Cox said in 2021 there was "certainly a partisan bend" in the map, noting that "Republicans are always going to divide counties with lots of Democrats in them and Democrats are always going to divide counties with lots of Republicans in them."
Context: The legislature has repealed and replaced other successful ballot initiatives with their own laws that don't hew to the policies voters approved.
- Lawmakers on Thursday defended the practice, arguing that the ruling will allow "big money and outside interest groups" to advance ballot initiatives without any barriers, Utah Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz wrote in a statement.
- "This is one of the worst outcomes we've ever seen from the Utah Supreme Court," they said.
Reality check: The ruling only applies to ballot initiatives that address government reform, Petersen wrote.
Zoom out: Voting rights advocates argue independent redistricting commissions lead to more competitive races and more representative candidates.
- In recent years, a growing number of states have sought to create independent redistricting commissions.
Editor's note: This story has been updated throughout.