Key Republican figures in Utah, including Gov. Spencer Cox and Senate President Stuart Adams, are intensifying their inquiry into state Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen amid troubling allegations. These claims involve her relationship with an attorney who has appeared in significant cases before the court.
Concerns were initially raised through a complaint submitted to Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and the state’s Judicial Conduct Commission late last year. The allegations suggest that Hagen may have exchanged inappropriate messages with attorney David Reymann, who played a role in redistricting decisions affecting Utah’s congressional map.
Both Hagen and Reymann have officially denied any misconduct. The allegations stem from statements made by Hagen’s ex-husband regarding their communications.
The Judicial Conduct Commission conducted a preliminary review but opted not to pursue an extensive investigation. This resolution has left state leadership dissatisfied.
In a joint statement, Cox, Adams, and House Speaker Mike Schultz expressed their concerns: “Important questions remain unanswered regarding these allegations, particularly with such serious implications for public officials. Transparency and accountability are critical to maintaining trust.”
Their commitment involves launching an independent investigation to ensure all facts are thoroughly examined.
These allegations trace back to Tobin Hagen, Justice Hagen’s ex-husband, who claimed that her communications with Reymann began during a pivotal lawsuit concerning the congressional maps. He conveyed that the nature of the messages escalated from light-hearted to suggestive.
This situation emerged from a highly scrutinized case, League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature. In 2024, the Utah Supreme Court determined that lawmakers had overreached by altering Proposition 4, a voter-approved anti-gerrymandering initiative.
Further disputes arose in 2024 regarding Amendment D, empowering lawmakers to nullify ballot initiatives. Hagen authored the majority opinion that upheld a lower court ruling rejecting the amendment.
The triggering complaint was submitted in December 2025 by attorney Michael Worley, who stated that he felt compelled to act on the information shared by Tobin Hagen, despite Tobin’s hesitations about filing it. Reports indicate he acknowledged the details as valid.
