Affair Allegations Rock Utah Supreme Court

Yellow police tape in front of crime scene.

A Utah Supreme Court Justice abruptly resigned on May 8, 2026, dodging a politically charged probe into an alleged affair with a lawyer challenging Republican redistricting maps—what secrets did her ex-husband’s texts reveal?[1][3]

Story Snapshot

Justice Diana Hagen quits amid claims of improper ties to attorney David Reymann, who fought Utah’s GOP congressional maps.[1][3]
Ex-husband sparked complaint with texts showing messages from “silly” to “suggestive” during marriage collapse.[1][2]
Judicial Conduct Commission dismissed case, but state leaders demanded deeper scrutiny.[1][3]
Hagen recused from Reymann cases in May 2025; leaders dropped probe post-resignation.[3][5]
Three branches pivot to reforming judicial oversight for public trust.[1][3]

Allegations Sparked by Ex-Husband’s Complaint

Justice Diana Hagen’s ex-husband triggered the scandal in December 2025 by alerting Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and the Judicial Conduct Commission. He claimed to have seen text messages between Hagen and David Reymann, lead attorney for the League of Women Voters in Utah’s redistricting lawsuit. Messages allegedly shifted from playful to suggestive as their marriage frayed.[1][2] A Provo attorney formalized the complaint, raising fears of judicial bias in a case reshaping congressional districts.

Reymann represented progressive groups contesting Republican-drawn maps as illegal. Hagen’s prior role on the Utah Court of Appeals fed suspicions her Supreme Court seat—appointed by Gov. Spencer Cox—compromised impartiality. No verbatim texts surfaced publicly, leaving claims reliant on the ex-husband’s account.[1][3]

Hagen’s Recusal and Official Defenses

Hagen reconnected with Reymann and other old friends in spring 2025, promptly updating her recusal list in May. The Utah Supreme Court noted this in its September 15, 2025, redistricting opinion. She denied conflicts, insisting her last involvement predated October 2024. Both Hagen and Reymann rejected affair allegations outright.[1][3][5]

The Judicial Conduct Commission launched an independent probe and dismissed the complaint, finding insufficient grounds. Hagen herself reported her ex-husband’s accusations to the commission. Yet questions lingered over renewed friendships with redistricting lawyers.[3]

State Leaders Demand Accountability

Gov. Spencer Cox, Senate President J. Stuart Adams, and House Speaker Mike Schultz issued a joint statement weeks before resignation, citing “serious questions” from external relationships. They pushed for investigation despite the commission’s dismissal, prioritizing public confidence in the judiciary.[1][2][3]

Conservative common sense demands judges avoid even the appearance of impropriety, especially in partisan battles like redistricting that safeguard fair representation. Leaders’ insistence aligns with protecting electoral integrity over blind trust in initial reviews.[1][3]

This important court resignation could have major implications in the battle over redistricting in Utah.

Justice Diana Hagen resigned from the Utah Supreme Court. Governor Cox, along with House Speaker Mike Schultz and Senate President J. Stuart Adams announced an investigation…

— Don Palmer (@VotingGuy) May 9, 2026

Hagen’s May 8 resignation letter to Cox expressed regret for court disruption but affirmed her oath to the Constitution. She cited protecting family privacy and judicial independence as reasons to step down immediately.[3][5]

Resignation Ends Probe, Shifts to Reforms

Leaders welcomed Hagen’s exit, declaring the matter concluded without further investigation. Chief Justice Durrant joined the statement, committing all branches to Judicial Conduct Commission reforms for stricter accountability.[1][3]

This pivot raises eyebrows—did politics sideline specifics for systemic fixes? Utah’s saga mirrors national trends: from 2010-2025, U.S. state supreme courts fielded 450 ethics complaints on relationship impropriety, with low discipline rates due to evidentiary gaps. Voluntary exits like Hagen’s often close chapters swiftly.[1][3]

Redistricting stakes amplify scrutiny; Reymann’s plaintiffs forced a new map last November, diluting GOP advantages. Hagen’s recusal timing holds up factually, but ex-husband’s unseen texts fuel doubts. Reforms could mandate disclosures, ensuring judges prioritize justice over personal ties.[2][3]