Other courts may also experience significant expansion…
The Salt Lake City Tribune reported Thursday that Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) has endorsed expanding the state Supreme Court from five to seven justices — as well as enlarging the court of appeals and district courts — to address growing caseload delays tied to the state’s population boom. Cox noted that the court’s annual output of 47–58 decisions has fallen below historical averages. He rejected accusations of “court packing,” emphasizing that he has already appointed three of the current justices.
The proposal comes as Republican lawmakers have suffered a string of defeats in high-profile court challenges involving abortion bans and ballot initiatives. Similar expansion efforts in other states offer mixed precedents: Arizona increased its high court from five to seven justices in 2016, producing only a modest rise in decisions, while Georgia’s expansion shifted the court to a Republican majority. Utah Chief Justice Michael Durrant has cautioned that additional justices could actually slow deliberations by increasing internal disagreements.
During a recent press briefing, Cox signaled that he is open to the idea of enlarging the court, a position highlighted by Tribune reporter Robert Gehrke:
That includes, he said, expanding the court of appeals and the district courts, as well, to speed up how long it takes for cases to make their way through the courts.
“We’re not the state we were 40 years ago. We’re not the state we were 20 years ago, from a size perspective,” Cox said. “There’s a reason most medium-sized states to larger states start to move to the seven-to-nine justice range.”
The expansion of Utah’s high court was originally proposed earlier this year after the court had dealt a series of defeats to Republican lawmakers — halting a law banning almost all abortions in the state and limiting the court’s ability to repeal citizen-passed ballot measures.
Because the number of justices on the court is set in law, and not the Constitution, it would not take an amendment to change the number.
The revelation comes just two weeks after a state judge invalidated the congressional map drawn by Utah’s Republican-controlled Legislature and ordered a replacement map — backed by progressive groups — to be used in the 2026 U.S. House elections.
Third District Court Judge Dianna Gibson ruled that the 2021 map violated voter-approved redistricting standards designed to prevent partisan gerrymandering. She instead selected a plaintiff-submitted map that significantly reshapes one district by keeping most of Salt Lake County intact, creating a +24 Harris district, and effectively guaranteeing Democrats a congressional seat for the first time in Utah history.
Reactions on X largely criticized Cox’s endorsement as hypocritical, contrasting Republican support for state-level judicial expansion with their opposition to Democratic efforts to expand the U.S. Supreme Court. Many commenters framed the dispute as part of a broader partisan divide over judicial reform, despite no evidence that Utah’s all-Republican-appointed high court has exhibited partisan bias.
READ NEXT: How Rush’s Thanksgiving Story Still Shapes The Nation
