Third District Court Judge John Nielsen is Gov. Spencer Cox’s pick to join the Utah Supreme Court.
If confirmed by the Utah Senate, Nielsen would fill the open seat left by Justice John Pearce after he retires from the bench Dec. 1. Pearce, who former Gov. Gary Herbert appointed, has spent nearly 10 years on the bench of the state’s highest court.
Speaking in the Gold Room at the Utah State Capitol for the Oct. 14 announcement, Cox told Nielsen, “I have no doubt that you will make this state proud.”
Nielsen was chosen from a pool of seven nominees selected by the Appellate Court Nominating Commission. Once it announced the names Sept. 2, a public comment period followed, after which Cox had 30 days to make a decision.
Nielsen first became a judge last year when Cox appointed him to the Third District Court. Before that, he was a partner at the Washington D.C.-based Schaerr Jaffe law firm and a shareholder in the Utah-based Lee Nielsen law firm.
KUTV reported in 2022 that Nielsen, along with former Utah Supreme Court Justice Thomas Lee, who had returned to private practice, had their firm hired by the state to defend its law banning transgender girls from competing in K-12 girls’ sports — a case that was recently dropped. Court documents show Nielsen withdrew as counsel in 2024, after he was appointed to the Third District Court.
Before his private legal career, Nielsen served as an assistant solicitor general in the Utah Attorney General's Office and a deputy Utah County Attorney. He graduated magna cum laude from Brigham Young University’s J. Reuben Clark Law School in 2007. He now also teaches classes at the state’s two law schools, BYU and the University of Utah.
Nielsen said he has a deep respect for the court as an institution.
“I will give my best and my all in this honored position, should the Legislature see fit to confirm me,” Nielsen said.
Nielsen would join the state’s highest court at a time of heightened tensions between the judiciary and the Legislature. The Supreme Court has drawn the ire of state lawmakers after some high-profile rulings where lawmakers came out on the losing side. That includes 2024 decisions about abortion, redistricting and proposed constitutional amendments.
Legislative leaders were not only unhappy with the outcomes, but they also thought the justices were wrong in their rulings. Republican leaders of the House and Senate called the redistricting decision “one of the worst outcomes we’ve ever seen from the Utah Supreme Court.”
Those tensions carried over into the 2025 legislative session, when lawmakers aimed to change how things work in Utah courts. Those efforts included changing the judicial retention process, altering time frames in which plaintiffs can challenge laws passed by the Legislature and changing who gets to choose the chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court. While lawmakers ultimately backed off on one of those after a united pushback from Utah’s legal community, others became law.
After Cox vetoed the measure giving him power over who becomes the court’s chief justice, lawmakers amended the bill in an Oct. 6 special session. It still took away the court’s power to elect its own chief justice and gave the governor that power, but lengthened the term to eight years. Bill sponsor Sen. Brady Brammer said this was a compromise agreement with the governor’s office. Cox signed it Oct. 14.
Senate President Stuart Adams and Speaker of the House Mike Schultz sat in the front row at the news conference where Cox appointed Nielsen.
The Utah Supreme Court is expected to consider more hot-button issues in the future.
A Third District Court judge ruled in August that Utah’s state-funded K-12 school voucher program, called the Utah Fits All Scholarship, was unconstitutional. The program iswas allowed to keep operating until the state Supreme Court weighs in. The state has until Nov. 5 to file with the court its written argument stating why it believes the lower court’s decision is wrong.
The state’s years-long fight over redistricting is likely to return to the court, as well. While the Utah Supreme Court denied the Legislature's emergency request to let them keep using the state’s 2021 congressional map after a lower court judge threw it out, the Legislature can still bring the overall case before the state’s highest court. Lawmakers have expressed their desire to appeal the lower court’s decision as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary.
Cox said his team carried out an intense vetting process of the seven nominees — interviewing them and examining everything they had ever written, argued or decided. Cox described Nielsen as one of the smartest people he’s ever interviewed.
“Judge Nielsen’s strengths in legal reasoning, clarity and precision stood out immediately,” the governor said. “His opinions and briefs are not only exceptionally well written, they reflect a deep commitment to justice, reasoning and the proper role of the judiciary.”
Cox and Nielsen both said they share similar legal philosophies.
“The governor summed it up really well with two words, textualist and originalist,” Nielsen said when asked by reporters about his judicial philosophy.
Originalism is a view that legal documents, especially the U.S. Constitution, should be interpreted as they were understood at the time of their adoption. It’s a popular view in the conservative legal movement.
Textualism is a view that laws should be interpreted only based on their plain meaning, not intent. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was a proponent of both philosophies.
“The essence of those philosophies is that you are trying to ensure that your interpretation fits with the intent of the lawmaker,” Nielsen said. “In the case of a statute: textualism, the will of the legislature. In the case of the Constitution, the will of the people who ratified it.”
Cox said he appreciated the speed at which Nielsen had ruled at the district-court level and said he wanted a justice who could be quick. The governor worries about how long it takes the Utah Supreme Court to issue decisions, something lawmakers have griped about before. Although he said he thinks the court probably needs more resources, a possible nod to the legislative leaders in the front row.
To meet the demands of the state, Cox also said the five-member bench might need to be expanded, potentially to seven or nine members.
Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Matthew Durrant spoke highly of Nielsen’s legal ability. Durrant has seen Nielsen regularly argue before the court he’s now slated to join.
“In those 25 years, I have never seen a better oral and written advocate than John Nielsen,” Durrant said. “He always knows the facts up and down as well as the law.”
“I am beyond thrilled that he will be joining our court, and I think he will be a great servant to the people of Utah,” Durrant said.
Nielsen will now go before the Utah Senate’s Judicial Confirmation Committee for a confirmation hearing. The full Senate will vote on his appointment.
Cox expects a final vote to happen before Pearce’s retirement on Dec. 1.
