Utah’s chief justice speaks out as Republicans look to expand the state Supreme Court

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The chief justice of Utah’s state Supreme Court cautioned lawmakers against meddling with the judiciary as Republicans pushed to add justices to the high court during their annual 45-day session that began Tuesday.

Republican legislative leaders and Gov. Spencer Cox have said they support a proposal to expand the five-judge panel to seven, arguing it would help speed up decision-making. Legal experts say the move could have the opposite effect and set a dangerous precedent at a time of tension between the two branches.

The move comes as Utah courts have dealt lawmakers a string of defeats on abortion restrictions, transgender athletes and the Legislature’s ability to change or repeal voter-approved initiatives. The Legislature is also preparing to appeal a redistricting ruling that gave Democrats a strong shot at picking up one of Utah’s four Republican-held congressional seats in the midterms this fall.

“I ask that your disappointment with a few results not lead to penalties for an entire branch of government and, by extension, penalties for your constituents,” Chief Justice Matthew Durrant said Tuesday in his yearly address to lawmakers.

The state Supreme Court does not challenge the Legislature’s integrity in its opinions, he said, asking lawmakers for the same courtesy when they challenge legal outcomes.

Durrant said it’s the Legislature’s prerogative to expand the Supreme Court, but he urged them to prioritize adding judges to lower courts, where the need is greater.

Cox included nearly $2.8 million in his proposed state budget that could help pay for two more Supreme Court justices. But John Pearce, who recently retired as an associate chief justice on the high court, said the money could go a lot further in the district and trial courts. He said adding justices could slow the work of the Supreme Court.

“If we’re really concerned about the efficiency of the judiciary, there are places where money would be much better spent than at the Supreme Court,” he said in an interview.

Most states have five or seven state Supreme Court justices, but a few have nine. Cox has said the additions would put Utah in line with other states of its size.

In Utah, justices are appointed by the governor and approved by the state Senate. Justices are elected in many other states, some in partisan elections where political parties are listed on the ballot.

Two states — Arizona and Georgia — have added justices in the past decade after making similar arguments about efficiency. In the years after Arizona grew its court in 2016, several past and present justices said the expansion made the high court less efficient because more people had to review drafted opinions before they could be issued.

“Another few cooks in the kitchen doesn’t necessarily get the cake baked any quicker,” said Chris Peterson, a law professor at the University of Utah. He proposed adding a judicial clerk for each justice to help them work faster.

In a December special session, Republican lawmakers voted to take authority from state Supreme Court justices to pick their own chief justice and instead let the governor choose. They also passed a resolution rebuking the courts over the redistricting ruling, with some calling for the district court judge’s impeachment.

Cox has denied that the proposal to add justices is politically motivated, noting that Republican governors and senators have made all recent appointments to the court.

Still, adding justices can be a slippery slope, Peterson warned.

“The fear is that if powerful political interests don’t get their way, they can simply add new justices to a state or even the federal Supreme Court to try to overturn decisions,” he said. “It can escalate and undermine trust in our government.”