The Utah Supreme Court released a statement on Apr. 17 addressing recent media reports about allegations involving Justice Diana Hagen.
The statement is intended to clarify the timeline of events and the actions taken by Justice Hagen and the court regarding her involvement in a case with the League of Women Voters, as well as subsequent allegations made by her ex-husband. The issue is significant because it concerns judicial ethics and public trust in the integrity of Utah’s highest court.
According to the court, Justice Hagen last participated in matters related to the League of Women Voters case in October 2024. In spring 2025, after reconnecting with old friends, she updated her recusal list and stepped away from further involvement in that case. The court said that “her ex-husband’s allegations post date her involvement” with that matter. When those allegations surfaced in December 2025, Hagen reported them herself to the Judicial Conduct Commission for investigation under procedures set forth by the Utah Constitution.
Justice Hagen provided a comment for multiple requests: “I never operated under a conflict of interest while performing my judicial duties. My last involvement in the redistricting case was October 2024. I voluntarily recused myself from all cases involving Mr. Reymann in May 2025, and my recusal was reflected in the Court’s September 15, 2025 opinion in League of Women Voters. I took prompt, prudent, and transparent steps in response to the allegations made by my ex-husband, including reporting them myself to the Judicial Conduct Commission and submitting a sworn statement. The Judicial Conduct Commission recently reviewed the matter, dismissed the complaint, and closed the case. I remain committed to upholding the highest standards of judicial ethics, integrity, and impartiality.”
The Judicial Conduct Commission is described as an independent body established by state constitution to investigate complaints against judges or justices through confidential hearings conducted by members appointed from legislative bodies, gubernatorial appointees, bar representatives and judges selected by justices themselves.
Following its review process—which included receiving all relevant information—the commission dismissed all complaints against Justice Hagen according to its constitutional authority.
Although proceedings are legally confidential under state law—and neither judiciary nor commission released any records—some materials were nevertheless disclosed publicly without authorization; this has led to renewed questions about previously investigated matters now resolved within established procedures.
The Utah State Courts feature justices serving renewable ten-year terms according to their official website. The courts also enhance community understanding through educational initiatives as per their website, maintain facilities across eight districts statewide per their website, comprise two appellate courts alongside trial courts across these districts as outlined online, aim for an open and fair justice system according to their site, and are led by five Supreme Court justices who elect a chief justice for oversight duties as per their official site.
