Affair Allegations Force Justice’s Fast Resignation

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

Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen resigned immediately on May 8, 2026, dodging a looming state investigation into an alleged affair with a redistricting attorney—leaving unanswered questions about judicial ethics in a politically charged case.[1][3]

Story Snapshot

Justice Diana Hagen steps down abruptly, citing family privacy after ex-husband’s claims of inappropriate texts with attorney David Reymann.[1][5]
Allegations tied to Utah’s redistricting lawsuit where Reymann challenged Republican maps; Hagen recused herself in May 2025.[3][5]
Judicial Conduct Commission dismissed initial complaint, but state leaders demanded deeper probe until resignation halted it.[1][2]
Governor Spencer Cox, legislative heads, and Chief Justice commit to reforming the Judicial Conduct Commission.[1][3]
Both Hagen and Reymann deny any wrongdoing, calling claims false amid her 30-year marriage’s end.[1][5]

Allegations Stem from Ex-Husband’s Complaint

Justice Diana Hagen’s ex-husband suspected an inappropriate relationship around their marriage’s deterioration. He claimed to see text messages between Hagen and David Reymann, attorney for the League of Women Voters in Utah’s redistricting case. The texts allegedly shifted from silly to suggestive. A Provo attorney filed the December 2025 complaint with Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and the Judicial Conduct Commission based on the ex-husband’s account.[1][5]

Reymann represented progressive groups challenging Republican-drawn congressional maps that preserved four red seats. Hagen’s involvement in the case ended in October 2024. She reconnected with old friends, including Reymann, in spring 2025 and updated her recusal list in May 2025. The Supreme Court noted this recusal appeared in the September 15, 2025, opinion.[3][5]

Judicial Conduct Commission Dismisses Case

The Judicial Conduct Commission launched an independent investigation into the complaint. It ultimately dismissed the matter, finding no basis to proceed. Hagen informed the court of her updated recusals upon renewing friendships. Her last redistricting participation predated these reconnections. No evidence surfaced linking the alleged relationship to judicial decisions.[1][5]

State leaders—Governor Spencer Cox, Senate President J. Stuart Adams, and House Speaker Mike Schultz—pushed for further review despite the dismissal. They cited serious questions about external relationships with redistricting lawyers. Their April 2026 demand highlighted distrust in the commission’s initial handling.[2][3]

Hagen’s Resignation Letter Details

On May 8, 2026, Hagen sent her resignation letter to Governor Cox, effective immediately. She expressed deep sadness and praised her colleagues as brilliant jurists. Hagen denied wrongdoing, emphasizing she upheld her oath and ethical duties. She prioritized her family’s privacy during her 30-year marriage’s painful end over continued service.[1][3]

Hagen wrote that public officials face higher scrutiny, but her loved ones deserve protection from personal details’ exposure. She regretted disrupting the court but saw no alternative without harming the judiciary’s independence.[1]

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

State Leaders Respond and Pivot to Reforms

Governor Cox’s office confirmed the resignation and appreciated Hagen’s service. Leaders Adams, Schultz, Chief Justice Durrant, and Cox issued a joint statement. They welcomed her step aside in the institution’s best interest and declared the matter concluded, dropping further investigations.[1][2]

The branches committed to Judicial Conduct Commission reforms for accountability and public confidence. The Utah State Bar welcomed potential involvement. This shift focuses on systemic changes amid Utah’s history of ethics complaints, where dismissals outnumber sanctions.[1][3]

Implications for Judicial Integrity and Redistricting

Conservatives rightly demand ironclad judicial impartiality, especially in redistricting battles protecting Republican seats. Hagen’s recusal and commission dismissal align with common-sense ethics—voluntary steps avert bias. Yet ex-husband’s unreleased texts raise valid appearance concerns; full disclosure would settle doubts.[1][5]

Utah’s case mirrors national trends: over 450 U.S. state supreme court ethics complaints from 2010-2025 involved relationship impropriety, with low discipline rates due to evidentiary gaps. Reforms could mandate forensic reviews, bolstering trust without politicizing courts. Hagen’s exit preserves the bench’s focus, but unresolved questions linger on transparency.[3]