Congressional hopefuls in Utah now have two extra months to decide whether to run. That’s one of several election changes on the horizon thanks to a suite of bills passed by the Legislature during a Dec. 9 special session.
The legislation came in reaction to Utah Third District Court Judge Dianna Gibson’s ruling that put a new congressional map in place. The map created four new districts, with one left-leaning district centered around northern Salt Lake County.
It did not take long for Utah’s GOP supermajority to react. Legislative leaders later announced their intent to call a special session to address what Senate President Stuart Adams characterized as “the most partisan and thus the most gerrymandered map in the history of the state of Utah.”
The most noticeable change made during the special session is SB2001, which pushes back the congressional candidate filing window by roughly two months from January to March — but only for 2026. In a committee hearing earlier in the afternoon, sponsor Sen. Scott Sandall explained the change is meant to give time for the courts to move through the entire appeals process of Gibson’s ruling before candidates need to decide to run or not.
“It simply allows enough time that, quite honestly, the judiciary did not allow us to have in the ruling,” Sandall said. “We're just resetting the time period, hopefully, so that we can get enough time for the appeals.”
If the map chosen by Gibson is left in place for the 2026 midterm elections, one of Utah’s four congressional districts will be competitive for a Democratic candidate. That very likely means one of the state’s four current Republican representatives — Blake Moore, Celeste Maloy, Mike Kennedy or Burgess Owens — will be out of their seat come 2027. As of the special session, none of the four representatives has indicated that they would not run in the midterms.
Another element of the bill changes signature-gathering requirements. Previously, a congressional candidate was only allowed to gather signatures within the district they were running to represent. Now, they can gather signatures from anywhere in the state. Sandall said this change is because, as of now, the Legislature is unsure which map will come out on top for the 2026 midterm. He said boundaries could “vary by hundreds of miles” from one map to another.
“If an appeal were successful, those boundaries would change, and you don't know whether they're going to change by five miles or 150 miles,” Sandall said when explaining the alteration. “To create a situation where a candidate could or could not gather signatures probably opens us up to lawsuits based on availability, accessibility. If you do a statewide participation, I think you probably reduce the viability of a challenge.”
As a whole, Utah’s county clerks have not taken an official position on the bill, but Weber County Clerk Ricky Hatch testified during the committee hearing that he and other clerks he has spoken with “don’t have any concerns.”
“There may be a slight increase in the number of signatures that are verified, but the clerks were understanding of that, understanding of the situation,” he said.
Other bills passed in the special session include amendments to court procedures for election and redistricting-related cases, which would make the Utah Supreme Court the exclusive jurisdiction for appeals of election, voting and redistricting cases. According to supporters, this would speed up the appeals process and align Utah with other states with similar systems.
“I know there's concern [of controversy] in a certain case before us today, but the concepts in this bill are not controversial,” said Sen. Mike McKell, speaking in favor of the bill. “We should always want judicial efficiency in legislation, and I think that's why this bill is important.”
Additionally, lawmakers passed a joint resolution that reaffirms the Legislature’s authority to draw congressional boundaries, as stated in the Utah Constitution.
The resolution is a direct rebuke to Judge Gibson’s ruling, something House GOP members condemned as an example of judicial overreach.
“There's been a gross miscarriage of justice here in this state today, but I'm hopeful the remedy will come through law,” said resolution sponsor, Rep. Casey Snider. “It will come through process. It will come through the people's voice. It will come through this Legislature. That is what this institution is expected to do, that is what our constituents expect us to do.”
Democrats, on the other hand, were equally spirited in their defense of Gibson and the judiciary.
“This resolution condemns the entire judiciary up and down from the district court to the Supreme Court,” said Rep. Grant Miller. “I don't agree with how the Legislature wants to pursue this appeal, but I could offer some advice: Do not offend the minds you're trying to persuade.”
The mood was no less lively outside legislative chambers as protestors gathered in the rotunda to rally against the special session. They sang versions of holiday songs like “Jingle Bells” and “The Night Before Christmas” with lyrics changed to reflect redistricting and legislative overreach.
“We're at a 1776 moment in Utah history,” former Republican lawmaker David Irvine told the crowd. “Not because we're faced with the tyranny of King George, but because we are faced with the tyranny of our very own Utah Legislature and the threat to our liberties today rhymes with the power of kings in 1776.”
Ultimately, all bills and resolutions proposed during the special session passed with the support of the Republican supermajority.
