POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Did Not Advance

Utah increases the number of judges across district courts, juvenile courts, and the Court of Appeals

Original title: Judicial Officer Amendments

Last action · March 6, 2026: Senate/ filedSponsor: Todd Weiler

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Proposed

Utah SB 57 expands the total number of judges by adding positions across multiple judicial districts and the Court of Appeals, effective May 6, 2026. Specifically, it increases district court judges in the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth districts, juvenile court judges in the Fourth district, and adds one judge to the Court of Appeals.

Why it matters

The measure alters judicial staffing levels across state courts, which directly affects caseload distribution, court scheduling, and administrative operations for litigants and attorneys across multiple Utah judicial districts.

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

district court judges

The authorized number of district court judges is increased across several judicial districts.

Directly affected

juvenile court judges

The authorized number of juvenile court judges is increased in the Fourth Judicial District.

Directly affected

Court of Appeals judges

The total number of Court of Appeals judges is increased from seven to eight.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which judicial districts are receiving additional district court judges?
The Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Judicial Districts are receiving additional district court judges.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · in Senate committee.

Procedural history

14 actions
  1. Mar 6, 2026Senate
    Senate/ filed
  2. Mar 6, 2026Senate
    Senate/ strike enacting clause
  3. Mar 5, 2026Senate
    Senate/ comm rpt/ sent to Rules
  4. Mar 4, 2026Senate
    Senate Comm - Recommends Returned to Rules
  5. Jan 21, 2026Senate
    Senate/ received fiscal note from Fiscal Analyst
  6. Jan 21, 2026Released
    LFA/ fiscal note publicly available for SB0057
Show 8 earlier actions
  1. Jan 20, 2026SenateCommittee
    Senate/ to standing committee
  2. Jan 20, 2026SenateIntroduced
    Senate/ 1st reading (Introduced)
  3. Jan 19, 2026Version Sponsor
    LFA/ fiscal note sent to sponsor for SB0057
  4. Jan 7, 2026Senate
    Senate/ received bill from Legislative Research
  5. Dec 29, 2025Legislative Fiscal Agency
    LFA/ bill sent to agencies for fiscal input for SB0057
  6. Dec 29, 2025Legislative Fiscal Analyst
    LFA/ bill assigned to staff for fiscal analysis for SB0057
  7. Dec 29, 2025Legislative Research and General Counsel
    Numbered Bill Publicly Distributed
  8. Dec 29, 2025Legislative Research and General Counsel
    Bill Numbered but not Distributed

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Connected Entities

Second Judicial District, Seventh Judicial District, First Judicial District and 7 more
locationSecond Judicial District“Judicial district where district court judges increase from 14 to 15, and juveni”Map →
locationSeventh Judicial District“Judicial district retaining three district court judges and two juvenile court j”Map →
locationFirst Judicial District“Judicial district retaining four district court judges and two juvenile court ju”Map →
locationSixth Judicial District“Judicial district where district court judges increase from two to three, and ju”Map →
PersonLONG“House Sponsor of SB 57”Map →
locationEighth Judicial District“Judicial district retaining three district court judges and two juvenile court j”Map →
locationThird Judicial District“Judicial district where district court judges increase from 32 to 35, and juveni”Map →
locationFifth Judicial District“Judicial district where district court judges increase from seven to eight, and ”Map →
locationFourth Judicial District“Judicial district where district court judges increase from 13 to 14, and juveni”Map →
PersonTodd Weiler“Chief Sponsor of SB 57 in the Utah Senate”Map →

Sources

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 45)
  • Controversy10
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz15
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record