SALT LAKE CITY – In one of the few vetoes issued in the wake of the 2025 general session of the Utah Legislature, Gov. Spencer Cox turned thumbs down on Senate Bill 296 (Judicial Amendments).
If enacted, S.B. 296 would have given the governor and the Senate the power to select the chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court, rather than allowing state justices to elect their own chief.
“This bill would change the longstanding statute under which the Utah Supreme Court elects its own leader,” Cox wrote in a letter of explanation to Senate Presidents J. Stuart Adams (R-Lawton) and House Speaker Mike Schultz (R- Hooper).
“If that were all the bill did, it is something that I could support,” Cox added. “However, this bill takes a very meaningful and problematic additional step by requiring the appointment process to occur every four years.
“Unlike the selection of the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (a lifetime appointment), the Chief Justice of the Utah Supreme Court would be required to go through a political appointment, a Senate confirmation committee and full Senate confirmation processes every four years.”
Cox’s veto came as the climax of a power struggle between the Legislature and the state judiciary that began in the summer of 2024.
That dispute began when the Utah Supreme Court ruled against the Legislature in a lawsuit brought by the League of Women Voters over what they alleged was partisan gerrymandering in the drawing of voting districts in Utah.
The League argued that the Utah Legislature violated Utahns’ constitutional right to alter and reform their government when lawmakers repealed and replaced Proposition 4, the citizen-driven ballot initiative to enact an independent commission to draw Utah’s new boundaries in the 2021 redistricting process.
In September, the Utah High Court added insult to injury by invalidating the Amendment D initiative on the November ballot, an effort by the Legislature to void the court’s previous anti-gerrymandering ruling.
Furious, members of the Legislature responded by introducing several bills into the recently completed general session that would have significantly revamped the form and function of the judicial branch in Utah.
Although Adams and Schultz insisted that those proposed changes were purely procedural, Cox chose to blunt the most threatening of those proposals embodied in Senate Bill 296.
“I admit it is very tempting to sign this bill and assure that the chief justice would need to stay in my good graces to retain his or her position,” Cox explained.
“But – just because I can – doesn’t mean I should,” he added. “While I appreciate your faith and trust in extending this new authority, I must respectfully decline.”
In his letter to Adams and Schultz, Cox acknowledged that he does not believe that the Utah Supreme Court is infallible or beyond reproach. In fact, the governor admitted that he is “deeply disappointed” in some recent court decisions that he believes are wrong.
“But just because I disagree with the court,” Cox emphasized, “does not mean that the system is broken or corrupted.”
Cox’s veto letter was issued on March 25, the same day that he signed 86 bills that originated in the Utah Senate and 114 proposals originating in the House.
The governor commented favorably on House Bill 2 (Public Education Budget Amendments), House Bill 100 (Food Security Amendments) and Senate Bill 178 (Devices in Public Schools), saying that he was particularly proud to sign those farsighted proposals.