Utah Supreme Court declines Legislature’s request to block new congressional map

The district court granted the request in part but declined to certify the entire case because it said some claims in the ongoing case were still pending.

“Rule 54(b) does not allow for immediate review of an order where that order does not finally resolve plaintiffs’ claim,” the justices wrote. “And here, no claim has been certified as final. Thus, certification under rule 54(b) is improper and we lack jurisdiction over legislative defendants’ appeal.”

The justices said the August order raises “important legal issues that warrant timely appellate review,” and said that if lawmakers appealed either recent ruling within 30 days, the high court would have had jurisdiction over the appeal.

Leaders of both the state House and Senate did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Utah Democratic Party celebrated the ruling, calling it “a resounding victory for voters and fair elections.”

“Prop 4 was passed to end partisan gerrymandering and put power back in the hands of the people, and today the courts made it clear: Lawmakers cannot ignore the law to protect their own political interests,” it said on social media.

The case has been ongoing for several years after a handful of plaintiffs alleged lawmakers violated Utahns’ rights when they overturned the state’s anti-gerrymandering law known as Proposition 4 and replaced it with a different law.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that lawmakers overreached by replacing Proposition 4, which was narrowly approved by the voters. Gibson threw out their map last year and later adopted a remedial map for the 2026 midterm elections.