Just weeks into Utah’s legislative session, lawmakers have approved major changes to the state’s court system, including an expansion of the Utah Supreme Court. Now, leaders of the Utah State Bar are raising concerns about strained financial resources and judicial independence.
The Legislature approved Senate Bill 134 last week, setting aside just over $6 million to add two Supreme Court justices, along with five judges in lower courts.
Speaking at a press conference Tuesday, Utah State Bar President Kim Cordova said the bar supports adding judges at the Court of Appeals and district court levels, but argued the $3 million for expanding the Supreme Court would be better spent elsewhere.
“What we want to make clear is that the justice system and the judiciary and the courts desperately need resources," she said, "but they need them on the bottom end.”
Cordova emphasized that district courts — where most Utahns interact with the justice system — are stretched thin, particularly when it comes to staffing and judicial assistants.
“We are told year after year that the budget is going to be tight —that they're cutting, she said, "but then to create a bill that's going to cost citizens millions and millions of dollars — in maybe a way that isn't the most useful — is concerning.”
Cordova added that the timing of the change is “interesting.” The expansion follows several high-profile court rulings that have frustrated Republican lawmakers, including a recent redistricting case that resulted in a court-ordered congressional map with a new Democrat-leaning district.
But Republican leaders have rejected claims the expansion amounts to court packing. During a bill hearing, floor sponsor District 5 Rep. Casey Snider, a Republican, said the goal is to bring Utah in line with other states, many of which have larger Supreme Courts. He pointed to requests from the courts for additional support.
“The chief justice came on the floor of this house several weeks ago and offered a solution whereby this body could provide additional resources," Snider said. "We have heard the inquiry and the request of the chief justice, and hopefully have acted accordingly with the provisions of this bill.”
But Democratic Rep. Grant Miller from District 24 pushed back, saying the expansion was not what the courts had asked for.
“They've asked for support for their staff and for their judiciary clerks and assistants," Miller said. "Nowhere in their wish list have they asked for two Supreme Court justices.”
Meanwhile, a brief published last week by the Brennan Center for Justice flagged Utah as one of several states where courts that rule against legislative majorities have been met with what it calls “retaliatory legislation.”
But the floor sponsor emphasized the bill was meant to be helpful, not hurtful.
“There may be some discussion at the highest levels — what is too many and what are too few?" Snider said. "But I would err on the side that seven sets of eyes reviewing the most complex and difficult issues our state has ever faced is better than having only five sets of eyes.”
