SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Utah Gov. Spencer Cox signed a bill Saturday to expand the state Supreme Court from five to seven justices, as Republican lawmakers grew frustrated with a series of court failures.
Supporters of the change argue it will help make courts more efficient, but legal experts say it could have the opposite effect and set a dangerous precedent at a time of tension between government departments. The state’s judiciary has not asked the court to add more judges.
Democrats who unanimously opposed the bill called the timing suspicious. The Legislature has been preparing to appeal a ruling that gives Democrats a strong chance of capturing one of Utah’s four Republican-held congressional seats in the fall.
New justices may be appointed as the court decides the fate of congressional maps.
Because the bill was approved by more than two-thirds of lawmakers, it took effect immediately upon the governor’s signature, allowing him to bypass a months-long waiting period to begin adding judges.
In Utah, justices are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate. Judges in many other states are elected.
Most states have between five and seven Supreme Court justices, but a few have nine. Cox, a Republican, said the additions would bring Utah in line with other states of similar size. He denied that the policy was politically motivated, noting that all recent appointments have been made by Republican governors and senators.
Once the new seats are filled, Cox will appoint five of the seven current judges.
Last month, Republican lawmakers took power from state Supreme Court justices to elect a chief justice and gave that authority to the governor.
“Seven pairs of eyes looking at the most complex and difficult issues our state has ever faced is better than just five,” said House Majority Leader Kathy Snyder, the bill’s Republican sponsor.
John Pearce, who recently retired as deputy chief justice, said this month he doubted the change would make the court more efficient.
“The more comments you have to consider, the longer the process will take,” Pierce said. “If what the Legislature is hoping to do is speed up the work of the courts, that’s going to be counterproductive.”
Two states, Arizona and Georgia, have added judges in the past decade after making similar arguments about efficiency.
In the early years after Arizona expanded its courts in 2016, several former and current judges said it made it less efficient because more people had to review opinions before they were issued.
Arizona courts are now handing out slightly more decisions each year, while Georgia courts are handing out slightly fewer decisions than before.
Utah Chief Justice Matthew Durrant told lawmakers on the opening day of the 2026 session that the courts have “essentially no backlog” and urged them to add judges to lower courts where the need is greater. The bill’s sponsors responded by adding a number of lower court judges and clerks.
The Utah Bar Association has expressed concerns about the expansion and other proposals, saying they would undermine the independence of the judiciary. One of the bills would create a new trial court with exclusive jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges. Three judges will be appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate.
___
Lee reported from Santa Fe, New Mexico.
