Finally some good election map news!

Victory! Utah legal battle fueled by Bright America restores citizen-won reforms that banned gerrymandering.

If you want a great example of why we invest in pro-democracy litigation, you’re in luck! Utah just gave our team a big win and tons of encouragement! A state trial court didn’t just slap a wrist, it reset the rules.

In a sweeping order, the court held that Utah’s Legislature violated the people’s constitutional right to alter or reform their government when it repealed a voter-approved anti-gerrymandering law (Proposition 4) and replaced it with a hollow substitute (S.B. 200). The bottom line: Proposition 4 is back. S.B. 200 is void. And the gerrymandered 2021 congressional map is enjoined for future elections.

What just changed—concretely (and why it’s a big deal)

• Prop 4 is reinstated — fully. The court found that repealing Prop 4 “unconstitutionally impaired” Utahns’ reform rights and wasn’t narrowly tailored to any compelling state interest; S.B. 200 is void ab initio. Translation: the people’s law never stopped being the valid law.

• The 2021 map can’t be used again. The court permanently enjoined H.B. 2004 for future elections and emphasized that enforcing Prop 4 going forward serves the public interest.

• A real remedy on a real clock. The Legislature has 30 days (until Sept. 24, 2025) to enact a compliant map and file it with the court; objections are due Oct. 3, and an evidentiary hearing is slated for soon after. The court retains jurisdiction to ensure a lawful map is in place for 2026.

• Prop 4’s teeth are back. Reinstatement doesn’t just mean a commission in name; it restores the seven-member independent commission, strict eligibility limits (no recent lobbyists, party officers, or electeds), a certification against gerrymandering, guaranteed funding and staff, and binding transparency steps (public posting, comment periods, and written explanations if the Legislature rejects the commission’s maps). It also revives the private right of action and fee-shifting to enforce compliance.

• Clear, voter-centric map standards govern the redo. Prop 4’s ordered priorities now apply again: minimize city/county splits (municipal splits prioritized), compactness, contiguity/ease of travel, preserve neighborhoods/communities of interest, follow natural features, and align boundaries across districts—plus an express ban on partisan gerrymandering and permission to use partisan-symmetry metrics to test fairness.

Why this matters beyond Utah

This ruling affirms something fundamental: voters’ initiative power to reform redistricting is a constitutional right in Utah — so when the Legislature erased Prop 4, it triggered strict scrutiny, and lost. The court even drew on comparative state-law experience (e.g., Michigan’s “adopt-and-amend” case) to underline that short-circuiting voter-initiated reforms is out of bounds; where politicians tried to erase reforms, the original voter-approved rules remained in force.

And yes, at a time when Texas attacked norms by pushing a mid-decade redrawing of congressional maps that could net up to five extra partisan seats — already drawing fresh lawsuits — Utah is exactly the hopeful counterexample we needed.

Our strategy here matches the broader national blueprint: end partisan gerrymandering, adopt independent commissions, and pass a strong federal guardrail (e.g., the Freedom to Vote Act) so the rules don’t whiplash state by state. And with the legal muscle of our strategic partner Campaign Legal Center, we’re doing just that.

How the courtroom logic translates to cleaner maps

• Causation matters. The court tied the 2021 map to the unlawful repeal, calling it the “fruit” of that violation — so you can’t fix the tree by keeping the fruit.

• Public-interest test isn’t abstract. The order states it’s “always” in the public interest to stop constitutional violations; enjoining the 2021 map is how you actually enforce Prop 4.

• Process with receipts. Lawmakers must either pass a Prop 4-compliant map or face competing, fully-briefed alternatives with October testimony under the court’s supervision. That’s not window dressing; that’s enforceable structure.

What’s next (and how Bright America helps)

The judge’s order in this case delivered accountability with teeth — exactly the kind of work Bright America funds through our partner CLC. If you want more Utah-style daylight — and less Texas-style back-room redraws — support Bright America’s pro-democracy work so we can keep powering wins that stick.