Utah Republicans Had Another Very Public Meltdown Over The Redistricting Ruling.

Another special edition of Republicans React!

We had so much fun last time roasting their reactions to the NYC mayor’s election that we’re making this a series. And because they can’t seem to help themselves from saying ridiculous things on social media, we’ll always be here to fact-check their every argument, call out their misinformation, and roast them a little along the way.

The added benefit is that it’s a great way to understand their thinking and how to combat their narrative and talking points when you encounter them in the wild.

On Monday, November 10, at 11:45 PM, the Third District Court ruled that the Utah Legislature’s redistricting Map C violated Proposition 4 (the anti-gerrymandering law that voters passed in 2018). The court rejected their gerrymandered map and instead selected a map drawn by the plaintiffs, the League of Women Voters of Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government, that creates one Democratic-leaning district in Salt Lake County.

The new map will be in place for the 2026 election. The Legislature can appeal, although likely nothing will change before the 2026 election. And also, don’t forget the Utah Supreme Court already ruled against them once, so their options are limited.

And as you might expect, Utah Republicans absolutely lost their minds.

Matt MacPherson

Rep. Matt MacPherson (R-26) tweeted at 12:01 AM, exactly 16 minutes after Judge Gibson’s 91-page ruling dropped at 11:45 PM, that he had “opened a bill to file articles of impeachment against Judge Gibson for gross abuse of power, violating the separation of powers and failing to uphold her oath of office to the Utah Constitution.”

Matt. Brother.

You’re not fooling anyone; we all know that tweet was pre-drafted. You had that locked and loaded, no matter what the judge ruled. There is absolutely zero chance you read all 91 pages of legal reasoning in 16 minutes, absorbed the constitutional arguments, reviewed the evidence from weeks of testimony, and then thoughtfully decided impeachment was the appropriate response.

Here’s the thing, though: Maybe the urgency is because you’re in one of the most competitive districts in the state under the new map? District 26 suddenly looks a lot less safe for you, Matt.

Trevor Lee

Rep. Trevor Lee tweeted something so factually wrong that even Grok (Elon Musk’s AI on Twitter) fact-checked him in the replies. And then he promptly deleted it.

Coward behavior, Trevor.

Look, we all say things online that we later regret. But when literally Elon Musk’s AI that lives on Twitter dot com fact-checks you in real time and says “actually, that’s not true,” and your response is to delete the tweet instead of just saying “my bad, I was wrong”? That’s not a good look.

It takes a special kind of commitment to being wrong to get corrected by a robot and then try to pretend it never happened. But here you are, Trevor. Making us all proud.

Thank you to the good people of Twitter (the few of them that are left) for screenshotting it before he hit delete. The internet is forever, Trevor. You should know this by now. Deleting the tweet doesn’t delete the embarrassment.

Mike Lee

1. Weird take. Here’s the thing, though. You are wrong because it actually is under Prop 4. In fact, Prop 4 says you can’t “unduly favor one party over another”. And as much as you don’t want to listen to the Supreme Court, they did rule that Prop 4 is the law of the land. As a lawyer, you should know that.

2. True, except when it is legislators completely ignoring the will of the people, and the Utah constitution protects the people’s ability to “alter or reform their government”.

3. Ok sure, yeah we know about how much power they have. You don’t need to tell us that, Mike. We’re painfully aware.

4. Ummmm how about checks and balances? Do you agree that the courts have the ability to check the government when it’s overreaching its power? Aren’t you the guy who believes in small government? But now we’re protecting unlimited legislative power? And, aren’t you the guy who keeps angling for a US Supreme Court appointment (which is nightmare fuel) so you can allegedly check and balance?

5. Again, see above.

Dan McCay

Dan, let’s get a little technical here for a second.

You keep arguing that the Legislature has exclusive power to draw maps, and it’s in the Constitution. But here’s what the Utah Supreme Court actually said:

In Section 197 of League of Women Voters v. Utah State Legislature, the court wrote: “[Proposition 4] did not take the authority to enact electoral maps from the Legislature and give it to the Independent Commission. Rather, it empowered the Independent Commission to create proposed maps, which the Legislature was required to consider.”

And Section 198: “Accordingly, under Proposition 4, the Legislature retained the ultimate responsibility for ‘divid[ing] the state into congressional, legislative, and other districts.’”

Nobody is saying you don’t have the power to draw maps. What Judge Gibson said and what the Supreme Court confirmed is that you have to follow Proposition 4 when you do it. You can’t just ignore the anti-gerrymandering standards voters approved. And Judge Gibson gave you all the opportunity to do that, and you blatantly ignored the law you were supposed to follow.

Also, Dan? The Scooby Doo meme? Really? You’re a state senator. The League of Women Voters and Mormon Women for Ethical Government sued to enforce a law that Utah voters passed. They won. The only “villain” getting unmasked here is partisan gerrymandering.

Grow up.

Candice Pierucci:

Candice, this is so lazy I’m almost impressed.

First: “One unelected judge”? Judge Gibson was appointed by Republican Governor Gary Herbert in 2018 and confirmed unanimously by the Republican-controlled Utah Senate. In 2022, the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission voted unanimously that she exceeded performance standards, and 75% of voters approved keeping her on the bench. Not to mention the fact that this one judge was following the ruling and standards set by the Utah Supreme Court, which is made up of five (5) people who were all appointed by Republican Governors and confirmed by the Republican-controlled Utah Senate.

But sure, she’s an “activist judge” now that she ruled against you.

Second: “Her personal opinion outweighs Utah’s Constitution”? No. Again, her ruling was based on Utah Supreme Court precedent and the plain text of Proposition 4. She cited pages and pages of evidence and expert testimony.

Third: You’re claiming she “orchestrated it from the start” because she... set deadlines and enforced them? That’s called managing a case, Candice. Judges do that. It’s their job.

When Rhetoric Becomes Threats

Multiple judges and court employees have received threats following the ruling.

On November 17, the Utah Administrative Office of the Courts released a rare statement condemning the threats and urging civility:

“Threats of violence against judges or court personnel are unacceptable, dangerous, and may violate state or federal law. Any conduct aimed at causing fear for a ruling or undermining the safe operation of the justice system strikes at the heart of the rule of law. Such actions endanger not only the individuals targeted but the functioning of the justice system itself.”

It’s not hard to see why this happened.

When Matt MacPherson tweets at midnight about “gross abuse of power” and threatens impeachment, what message does that send to his supporters?

When Dan McCay posts Scooby Doo memes depicting the plaintiffs as villains, what kind of environment is he creating?

When Candice Pierucci claims Judge Gibson “orchestrated it from the start” in some vast conspiracy, what is she encouraging people to believe?

These aren’t just political disagreements. These are deliberate attempts to undermine a judge’s legitimacy and paint her as an enemy of the people. And when you tell your supporters that a judge is violating the Constitution, abusing power, and orchestrating conspiracies against them, some of those supporters will take matters into their own hands.

To his credit, Speaker Mike Schultz told FOX 13 News: “Political violence is sad and for threats to be made? It’s unacceptable. Look, while I disagree with the judiciary’s decision, we certainly have to respect the role they play and any type of threat is not OK.”

But here’s the thing, Mike: You can’t spend a week calling the judge illegitimate and then act surprised when people threaten her.

You don’t get to light the match and then condemn the fire.

The Utah judiciary defended its independence in its statement:

“Judges have a constitutional duty to apply the law to the facts before them, independent of external pressures. That independence is essential to preserving the separation of powers and ensuring that justice is administered fairly and impartially.”

This is what checks and balances look like. This is what judicial independence looks like. And when politicians deliberately undermine public faith in the judiciary because they didn’t like one ruling, they’re not defending the constitution; they’re attacking it.

The Pattern We’re Seeing

Let’s zoom out for a second and look at what’s actually happening here:

1. They have a supermajority. They control everything in Utah. When they don’t like the rules, they change them.

2. But our constitution has checks and balances. And for once, those checks are actually working.

3. They’re furious about it. They’ve spent their entire political careers defending these institutions – separation of powers, judicial independence, rule of law – and now that those institutions are checking their power, they want to tear them down.

4. They’re taking lessons from Trump. Threaten judges. Call them “activists.” Claim they’re “unelected.” Demand impeachment. Undermine public faith in the judiciary.

For now, we’re grateful there are judges who are willing to enforce the law even when it’s politically unpopular with those in power. We’re grateful voters aren’t going to stand for this. And we’re grateful that—at least for 2026—Utah will have congressional districts that follow the anti-gerrymandering standards voters approved.

But make no mistake: This fight isn’t over. The Legislature will appeal. The Utah Republican Party is collecting signatures to repeal Proposition 4. Governor Cox supports the appeal. And Republicans across the state are working overtime to undermine Judge Gibson and the judicial system that held them accountable.

What You Can Do

1. Defend Judge Gibson. When you see people calling her an “activist judge” or claiming she violated the Constitution, push back. Share the facts: She was appointed by a Republican governor, confirmed unanimously, retained by voters, and enforced a law that the Utah Supreme Court already upheld.

2. Oppose the repeal effort. The Utah GOP is trying to collect 140,000 signatures to repeal Proposition 4 and put it on the 2026 ballot. If someone asks you to sign, say no. And tell them why.

   1. If you see signature gatherers and they are misleading the public with their messaging, report it here.

3. Support organizations defending fair maps. Better Boundaries, the League of Women Voters of Utah, and Mormon Women for Ethical Government have been fighting this battle for years. They need support.

4. Remember this in 2026. Matt MacPherson, Candice Pierucci, Dan McCay, and the rest of the Republicans throwing tantrums about this ruling are up for re-election. Hold them accountable.