The Utah Legislature is sending the courts expansion bill to Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, making it one of the first bills to make it to his desk for the 2026 session.
The bill, SB134, passed after a vote on the House floor Friday morning, 57 to 18. Once Cox signs the bill, as expected, it will mark the first time since 2016 that a state has increased the number of judges on its Supreme Court bench.
The court expansion bill, headed by Sen. Chris Wilson, R-Logan, adds two more judges to the state Supreme Court’s five-person bench. It also adds judges to the Court of Appeals, and one district court judge each in Salt Lake City, St. George and Provo.
So much of the feedback given through public comment during the bill’s circulation in the legislature was focused on opposition to the two additional Supreme Court justices.
Wilson’s bill, and others focused on overhauling the judiciary this session, have been accused of court packing, ignoring the requests made by the state’s judiciary and trying to breach the independent separation of powers between the two governing bodies.
When asked during Senate availability what it says about the House and Senate’s priorities to be sending this bill so quickly through the Legislature, Senate President Stuart Adams said, “It tells you we value the courts.”
Wilson added that SB134 is the “biggest commitment” Utah lawmakers have made to their law-interpreting counterparts. During the House floor vote, the bill’s floor sponsor, Rep. Casey Snider, R-Paradise, said he hopes that public perception sees the bill as “in the spirit with which it is offered, which is that of one in hopes of being helpful.”
Utah Democrats oppose Utah court expansion, but GOP says it’s overdue
Despite GOP lawmakers’ intentions, the bill was largely opposed by their Democratic colleagues. Rep. Grant Amjad Miller, D-Salt Lake City, said that though he favored some of what the bill offered, he ultimately voted against it because it doesn’t prioritize the needs of the public. He also noted “the great expense” it would cost the state to expand the Supreme Court alone.
“The courts have issued a wish list to us,” Miller said during the House floor vote. “At the top, they have asked for support for their staff and for their judiciary clerks and assistants. Nowhere in their wish list have they asked for two Supreme Court justices.”
Rep. Andrew Stoddard, D-Sandy, added that he believes adding more judges to the bench would further complicate the process.
“I don’t think that this is the route if we want to speed up our cases,” he said. “The hold up is in the district court and occasionally in the court of appeals, but is not the Supreme Court.”
Despite their opposition, Wilson said that “it’s a great bill” and “a great step forward ... ”Looking at the number of filings, looking at the case complexity, it’s obvious, in my opinion, with the data and evidence, that it’s long overdue."