A Utah Supreme Court justice who allegedly had an inappropriate relationship with an attorney who’d been arguing redistricting cases before her has resigned in disgrace.
Justice Diana Hagen resigned on Friday amid pressure from state Republicans, including Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, who’ve been investigating her alleged affair since last month.
Cox, in addition to Utah state Senate President J. Stuart Adams and Utah state House Speaker Mike Schultz suspect Hagen had an inappropriate relationship with an attorney who’d been arguing in favor of a pro-Democrat redistricting map — one that Hagen later approved.
JUST NOW: Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen RESIGNS — the same justice who helped give Democrats +1 Congressional seats out of Utah for the midterms
She’s embroiled in a scandal of reportedly having an AFFAIR with an attorney involved in that redistricting case
GOOD… pic.twitter.com/qGmRsnblEJ
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 8, 2026
Their suspicion is based on allegations contained in a complaint that was filed last year by another attorney who claimed Hagen’s ex-husband had told him about her “inappropriate” text messages with attorney David Reymann, according to station KSL.
The allegations from the ex-husband, Tobin Hagen, are that around the time his marriage was falling apart in 2024, he saw “inappropriate text messages” between her and Reymann.
However, in a declaration to the Judicial Conduct Commission, Hagen vowed that she’d been “faithful to my ex-husband for more than 30 years.”
“I never engaged in extramarital sex with anyone prior to our separation,” she added.
They were officially divorced in April of last year.
“While my ex-husband’s accusations of adultery are false and the intimate details of my failed marriage have nothing to do with my judicial duties or my strict adherence to the Code of Judicial Conduct, I have chosen to self-report these allegations to the Commission to officially refute them under oath,” she continued.
But there’s a problem.
She also admitted in her declaration that both she and her then-husband had attended an event at Reymann’s home on Nov. 3, 2024, which was less than two weeks after she wrote an opinion in a redistricting case that Reymann had been arguing.
Hagen has nevertheless maintained her innocence.
“My last involvement in the redistricting case was October 2024,” she said last month in a public statement distributed by the Utah Supreme Court. “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.”
Hagen announced her resignation on Friday in a letter to Cox.
Utah News Dispatch: Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen announces her resignation from the court.
Hagen faced allegations she had a relationship with an attorney involved in a case about redistricting, which led to Utah getting a new congressional map. pic.twitter.com/aFQI3Uw8Lf
— Politics & Poll Tracker
(@PollTracker2024) May 8, 2026
“As a public servant for twenty-six years, I am keenly aware that public service requires sacrifice,” she wrote, according to Fox News. “I have willingly accepted those sacrifices for the privilege of holding a position of public trust, where I could do my part to uphold the rule of law and protect the constitutional rights of every Utahn.”
“I also understand that public officials are rightly held to a higher standard and must accept a greater degree of public scrutiny and diminished privacy. But my family and friends did not choose public life. They do not deserve to have intensely personal details surrounding the painful dissolution of my thirty-year marriage subjected to public scrutiny,” she added.
She’s backed by the Utah Supreme Court, which recently issued a statement claiming that the allegations against Hagen had been “inappropriately released to the public,” as reported by Utah News Dispatch.
“Despite their protected status, records of the Judicial Conduct Commission were inappropriately released to the public,” the court said. ” The Judiciary does not have access to those records and did not release them. The Judicial Conduct Commission has indicated that they did not release them.”
“The inappropriate release of these materials prompted renewed questioning about allegations that were previously investigated and dismissed in accordance with the process established by the Utah Constitution,” the court added.
