Justice Resigns Over Explosive Cheating Allegations!

Interior view of an empty courtroom with wooden benches and a judges bench

A Utah Supreme Court justice abruptly resigned on May 8, 2026, dodging a state probe into an alleged affair with a lawyer tied to a explosive redistricting battle—but what hidden texts might still upend Utah’s political map?[1][5]

Story Snapshot

Justice Diana Hagen quits amid ex-husband’s claims of inappropriate texts with attorney David Reymann during a key redistricting case.[1][4]
Judicial Conduct Commission dismissed the complaint, yet state leaders demanded deeper scrutiny before her exit.[1][3]
Hagen denied wrongdoing, citing family privacy after a 30-year marriage’s end.[1][3]
Leaders halted probes post-resignation, pivoting to Judicial Conduct Commission reforms.[1][2]
Reymann represented progressive groups challenging Republican maps; Hagen recused herself in May 2025.[5]

Allegations Spark from Personal Turmoil

Justice Diana Hagen’s ex-husband triggered the scandal in December 2025 by filing a complaint through a Provo attorney with Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and the Judicial Conduct Commission.[1] He claimed seeing text messages between Hagen and David Reymann, an attorney for the League of Women Voters, evolving from silly to suggestive as their 30-year marriage crumbled.[1][4] Reymann challenged Republican-drawn congressional maps preserving four safe seats.[4][5]

Hagen joined the Utah Supreme Court in 2022, facing a retention election that fall.[1] Her ex-husband’s suspicions timed to the couple’s deteriorating marriage raised flags about external influences during high-stakes litigation.[1]

Redistricting Case Fuels Conflict Concerns

Reymann led efforts against maps favoring Republicans in Utah’s four congressional districts.[4][5] Hagen’s last direct involvement ended October 2024, but she renewed friendships with involved lawyers, including Reymann, in spring 2025.[3][5] She updated her recusal list in May 2025, stepping aside from Reymann-related cases, as noted in the court’s September 15, 2025 opinion.[5]

The Utah Supreme Court defended her, stating reconnections postdated her redistricting work and her ex-husband’s claims came later.[5] Still, questions lingered: did personal ties taint impartiality in a case safeguarding conservative strongholds?[4]

State Leaders Push Back Against Judicial Shield

Governor Spencer Cox, Senate President J. Stuart Adams, and House Speaker Mike Schultz demanded an independent investigation weeks before her resignation, citing serious questions on external relationships.[1][2] They questioned the Judicial Conduct Commission’s initial dismissal despite its independent review.[1][5]

Common sense demands judges avoid even the appearance of impropriety, especially in partisan map fights where one whisper of bias erodes trust in conservative-leaning courts.[3] Leaders’ insistence aligned with accountability over unchecked denials.[2]

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 and Reymann denied any improper relationship; he called allegations false.[1][6] Yet uncorroborated texts described by her ex-husband left gaps—no public forensics or verbatim quotes surfaced.[1]

Resignation Halts Probe, Ignites Reforms

On May 8, 2026, Hagen resigned effective immediately in a letter to Governor Cox, expressing deep sadness and praising colleagues.[1][8] She prioritized family privacy amid divorce scrutiny, accepting higher standards for public officials but shielding loved ones.[1][3]

Leaders welcomed her step, declaring the matter concluded without further probes.[1][2] Cox’s office confirmed receipt; all branches committed to Judicial Conduct Commission reforms for accountability and public confidence.[1][2][3]

Broader Implications for Judicial Trust

This episode mirrors national trends: U.S. state supreme courts faced over 450 ethics complaints on relationship impropriety from 2010-2025, with 28% in partisan disputes like redistricting, yet only 12% yielding discipline due to evidentiary issues.[9] Utah’s Commission dismissed most similar cases 8:1.[9]

Conservative values prioritize transparency—reforms could mandate text disclosures and swift recusals, preventing future shadows over fair rulings. Hagen’s exit protected her family but exposed systemic vulnerabilities, hinting at unreleased evidence that could reopen wounds.[1][5]