Utah Governor Orders Investigation into Supreme Court Justice Over Alleged Improper Relationship

Republican Utah Governor Spencer Cox and top state lawmakers have launched an independent investigation into allegations that State Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen maintained an unethical relationship with an attorney involved in a high-profile redistricting case.

The allegations center on what Justice Hagen’s ex-husband described as “inappropriate” text messages between Hagen and attorney David Reymann, who represented progressive voting rights groups challenging Utah’s Republican-drawn congressional map. The state Supreme Court, including Hagen, unanimously struck down the redistricting plan in July 2024, a decision that transformed one traditionally Republican district into a Democratic seat ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

The investigation comes after the husband’s lawyer filed a formal complaint with Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and the state’s Judicial Conduct Commission. According to local media outlet KSL, the commission conducted a preliminary review but decided not to pursue the matter further.

Both Justice Hagen and attorney Reymann have categorically denied the allegations.

In a statement issued through the Utah Supreme Court on Friday, Hagen defended her actions and emphasized her commitment to judicial ethics. “My last involvement in the redistricting case was October 2024,” she stated. “I voluntarily recused myself from all cases involving Mr. Reymann in May 2025.”

Hagen further explained that she had taken “prompt, prudent, and transparent steps” following her ex-husband’s allegations, including self-reporting to the Judicial Conduct Commission and providing a sworn statement. She noted that the commission had reviewed the case and dismissed the complaint.

According to information uncovered during the commission’s preliminary investigation, Hagen and her husband began discussing divorce in September 2024. The couple reportedly had interactions together with Reymann toward the end of that year, but Hagen allegedly did not meet one-on-one with Reymann until 2025, months after the redistricting decision was rendered.

The timing of the relationship has significant implications for the redistricting case. The court’s July 2024 decision effectively altered Utah’s congressional makeup by creating a competitive district that flipped from Republican to Democratic control. If improper contact occurred before or during the case deliberations, it could potentially undermine the legitimacy of the ruling.

Governor Cox, who originally appointed Hagen to the bench, joined Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz in expressing concerns about the adequacy of the initial review. In a joint statement, they emphasized that “more transparency” was needed on the matter.

“An initial review by the Judicial Conduct Commission and the court left important questions unresolved,” the statement read. “Allegations of this nature, especially involving public officials, must be examined with transparency and accountability to establish the facts and to maintain public confidence.”

The allegations highlight the politically charged nature of redistricting battles nationwide. In recent years, state and federal courts have increasingly been drawn into disputes over congressional maps, with both Republicans and Democrats challenging district boundaries they consider unfair or unconstitutional.

The independent investigation ordered by Cox and legislative leaders underscores the seriousness with which state officials view potential judicial impropriety, particularly in cases with far-reaching electoral consequences. The outcome could have implications not just for Hagen’s judicial career but also for public confidence in the Utah Supreme Court’s impartiality on politically sensitive matters.

As the investigation unfolds, questions remain about whether the findings might impact the redistricting decision itself or future election maps in the predominantly Republican state.