Why Justice Diana Hagen Stepped Down from the Utah Supreme Court: A Deep Dive into the Controversy

The Utah legal community has been shaken by the sudden resignation of Justice Diana Hagen from the Utah Supreme Court. In a move that has sparked significant conversation regarding judicial ethics and the boundaries of privacy, Hagen’s departure comes amidst a probe into an alleged relationship with an attorney involved in a high-stakes redistricting case.

The Core of the Controversy: Redistricting and Allegations

The controversy began when allegations surfaced regarding a relationship between Justice Diana Hagen and David Reymann, an attorney who represented progressive voting rights groups. Reymann was instrumental in challenging a Republican-friendly congressional map—a move that aimed to reshape the political landscape of Utah by contesting the four “red” congressional seats.

The situation escalated when Hagen’s former husband filed a complaint with the Judicial Conduct Commission and Chief Justice Matthew Durrant, citing “inappropriate” communications between the Justice and the lawyer. While the Judicial Conduct Commission initially conducted a preliminary investigation and chose not to proceed, the cloud of scrutiny remained.

Choosing Family Over the Bench

In a poignant resignation letter addressed to Utah Governor Spencer Cox, Justice Diana Hagen emphasized the heavy toll that public scrutiny has taken on her personal life. Having served as a public servant for twenty-six years, Hagen acknowledged that while public officials must accept a higher standard of accountability, the privacy of their families should remain intact.

“My family and friends did not choose public life. They do not deserve to have intensely personal details surrounding the painful dissolution of my thirty-year marriage subjected to public scrutiny,” Hagen wrote.

Hagen asserted that her resignation was necessary to protect the well-being of her loved ones and to ensure the independence of Utah’s judiciary, preventing her personal struggles from overshadowing the court’s functioning.

Timeline of Recusal and Resignation

To maintain transparency, Justice Hagen had already taken steps to distance herself from the conflicting interests long before her final exit:

• October 2024: Hagen’s final involvement in the redistricting case occurred.
• May 2025: She voluntarily recused herself from all cases involving attorney David Reymann.
• September 2025: Her recusal was officially reflected in the Court’s opinion regarding the League of Women Voters.
• Present: Immediate resignation from the Utah Supreme Court.

What Happens Next for the Utah Judiciary?

The responsibility now falls upon Governor Spencer Cox to appoint a replacement for the vacant seat. This transition occurs during a period of intense legal battles over redistricting across the United States, where the drawing of electoral maps continues to be a focal point of political friction and legal challenges.

Justice Diana Hagen’s departure serves as a stark reminder of the complex intersection between the American judicial system, public trust, and the right to personal privacy.