Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen announced her resignation on Friday, effective immediately, following an investigation into her alleged personal relationship with an attorney involved in a significant redistricting lawsuit. The lawsuit garnered controversy by potentially securing an additional U.S. House seat for Democrats.
Details of the Resignation
In her resignation letter to Governor Spencer Cox, Hagen expressed her sadness at the situation and conveyed her respect for her fellow justices. She acknowledged the disruption her exit might cause the court and its ongoing cases. Hagen suggested that while public officials are subject to scrutiny, her family and friends, who did not choose a public life, should not be exposed to public examination regarding her personal matters during this challenging time.
Background of the Allegations
The circumstances leading to Hagen’s resignation began with a formal ethics complaint filed in December 2025 by attorney Michael Worley. This complaint was directed to the Judicial Conduct Commission and Chief Justice Matthew Durrant, primarily based on information from Hagen’s ex-husband, Tobin Hagen. It alleged that Justice Hagen engaged in an improper relationship with attorney David Reymann, who represented plaintiffs in the high-profile congressional redistricting case.
The complaint included references to text messages that purportedly indicated the relationship could have influenced her judicial decisions. Investigators reviewed the complaint and supporting documentation but found insufficient evidence to substantiate claims of judicial misconduct. Their report characterized the allegations as speculative, overstated, and lacking credibility.
The Immediate Aftermath
Following the release of a preliminary report in April 2026, which was made public through an open records request, Governor Spencer Cox along with Republican legislative leaders called for an independent investigation, acknowledging the seriousness of the allegations. However, once Hagen resigned, legislative leaders declared the matter closed, and no further investigations would take place.
Context of the Redistricting Case
The allegations against Hagen are linked to the case of League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature, a redistricting dispute that reached the Utah Supreme Court. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. Notably, Hagen was part of a unanimous decision that invalidated a proposed constitutional amendment related to the redistricting process due to ballot language issues. Subsequently, in November 2025, the court adopted a remedial map that largely preserved Salt Lake County in a single district, resulting in a configuration perceived to favor Democrats in a state previously dominated by Republican representation.
On February 20, 2026, the Utah Supreme Court dismissed the appeal from the Legislature concerning the new map on procedural grounds. Additionally, a federal court declined to intervene with the map, allowing it to proceed into the upcoming 2026 elections. Notably, Hagen had recused herself from the redistricting proceedings after spring 2025, and all significant rulings during the case after that point were unanimous.
The situation surrounding Justice Diana Hagen reflects ongoing tensions and challenges in the political landscape, specifically regarding judicial integrity and redistricting practices. The case will be a point of discussion as Utah prepares for the 2026 elections and potential legal ramifications stemming from the redistricting process.