Public Comment

Utah is using a new congressional map after courts concluded that the legislature had circumvented standards approved by voters in a 2018 anti-gerrymandering initiative. The court-selected map creates a Democratic-leaning Salt Lake-area district and changes the state’s prior four-district configuration. The dispute concerns voter initiatives, legislative authority, judicial remedies, partisan fairness, and how long a court-imposed map should remain in place. Gerrymandering is drawing election districts to advantage a party or political group rather than applying neutral representational criteria. Voters approved a mapmaking reform. Legislators should not be able to erase it, but judges also should not become Utah’s permanent mapmakers.

Who should control Utah’s congressional maps after lawmakers bypassed voter-approved standards?

Overall results

1
55% support · excluded by 2%
7

A binding commission can prevent future disputes by specifying who selects members, which criteria control, and when lawmakers may reject a proposed map.

7

Public map data, scoring, hearings, and written explanations would let courts review compliance without drawing the map themselves.

2
52% support · excluded by 7%
7

A remedy must be durable enough to prevent officials from benefiting after unlawfully circumventing rules adopted by voters.

7

Repeated changes would confuse voters and candidates, while the current map provides a stable remedy until the ordinary 2030 cycle.

3
48% support · excluded by 7%
4
45% support · excluded by 7%
7

Legislators are politically accountable for districting choices, while judges are not elected to balance the many policy judgments involved.

About the author