Did the Judge Sit on Utah’s Redistricting Case? I Decided to Check for Myself — Here’s Exactly How I Used AI to Find the Truth

Uncategorized Utah State
John MulhollandLeave a Comment on Did the Judge Sit on Utah’s Redistricting Case? I Decided to Check for Myself — Here’s Exactly How I Used AI to Find the Truth
Redistricting timeline

Over the past few weeks, I’ve heard a surprising number of people confidently claim that Judge Dianna Gibson “sat on” Utah’s redistricting case. One neighbor even told me:

“She held it for eight months so she could force the map she wanted.”

That bothered me — not because I assume judges are always right, but because this accusation was incredibly specific.
Eight months? Really?

I’ve learned to be extremely careful in my writing. In all of my articles, I require myself (and the AI assistant I use) to be at least 95% certain of any factual claim, and to support it with real external citations, not my own recollection or opinion. I invite those I mention to review my articles for accuracy, especially when they are the candidate.

So instead of accepting the rumor, I decided to check for myself — and to do it in a way anyone can now do:
by using AI as a research assistant to pull up publicly available facts.

Below are the actual prompts I used and what I found.

Prompt #1: “When did the Legislature officially submit Map C?”

This alone disproved the rumor.

Public reporting shows:

The court’s remedial deadline (tied to the 2026 election calendar) was early November 2025, leaving about five weeks for judicial review.

If a map was submitted in October, the judge could not have “sat on it” for eight months.
There weren’t eight months available.

Prompt #2: “Why is there a three-year gap between the lawsuit and the first major ruling?”

Here is what the timeline shows:

The trial court could not issue a final remedy until the Utah Supreme Court decided the legal standard.

That’s not delay — that’s procedure.

Prompt #3: “Why did it take about a year from the Supreme Court decision before Judge Gibson struck down the 2021 map in 2025?”

This completes the picture.

Once the Utah Supreme Court issued its July 2024 ruling, the district court entered the remand phase, which required:

  • New briefing under the new constitutional standard
  • Scheduling for the remedy phase
  • Determining whether the 2021 map violated the newly clarified rule

On:

Only after that August ruling did the Legislature begin the process of submitting a replacement map.

Then:

That’s the whole cycle — and the actual timeline matches none of the rumor.

Why I’m Sharing My Prompts

I want people to see exactly how they can use AI the same way:

AI should not be treated as an authority.
AI should be treated as a tool to pull up the information you then verify.

By asking:

  • When was the map filed?
  • When did the rulings occur?
  • What does the Supreme Court opinion say?
  • What do the news reports say?

…I was able to test the rumor against the public record.

And the public record shows:

**There is no factual basis for the claim that Judge Gibson “sat on” the case.

The timeline doesn’t allow for it.**

Clean, Citation-Ready Timeline

Here’s the verified timeline, with links you can copy into WordPress:

• November 2021 — Legislature enacts the congressional map later challenged.

SOURCE: https://www.deseret.com/utah/2021/11/10/utah-redistricting-map-passed

• March 2022 — Lawsuit filed (League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah Legislature).

SOURCES:
https://www.democracydocket.com/cases/utah-congressional-redistricting/
https://thearp.org/litigation/lwv-utah-v-utah-leg/

• 2022–2023 — District court issues early rulings; Legislature appeals.

SOURCE: Procedural history in Utah Supreme Court opinion
https://law.justia.com/cases/utah/supreme-court/2024/20220991.html

• July 11, 2024 — Utah Supreme Court issues major constitutional ruling.

SOURCE: https://law.justia.com/cases/utah/supreme-court/2024/20220991.html

• January 31, 2025 — Oral Arguments for the new case (harder to find)

SOURCE: https://www.yahoo.com/news/utah-congressional-maps-judge-hears-033140838.html

This is where the claimed gap is. First, it is only seven months, and second, plenty of things have to happen during this time so it isn’t abnormally long as it is both redistricting and dealing with the Constitution of Utah.

To be straight, it seems like the argument is that the judge took a long time to make the first ruling, gave the legislature a second chance to submit a map that complied with the requirements. The legislature failed to do this a second time, after it was made clear they had to follow the requirements of prop 4, and somehow it is the judge’s fault for being thorough in that ruling? What about personal responsibility here for submitting a valid map the second time?

Judges don’t get the luxury of sharing false information on social media to strengthen their case.

• August 26–27, 2025 — Judge Gibson rules 2021 map unconstitutional.

SOURCES:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/judge-orders-redrawing-utahs-congressional-map-2025-08-26/
https://apnews.com/article/utah-redistricting-gerrymandering-2025

• October 6, 2025 — Legislature submits “Map C” (remedial map).

SOURCE: https://www.ksl.com/article/51385948/see-the-new-congressional-map-adopted-by-utah-lawmakers

• November 10, 2025 — Judge Gibson rejects Map C and adopts plaintiffs’ map.

SOURCES:
https://www.kuer.org/politics-government/2025-11-11/utah-judge-picks-plaintiffs-congressional-map
https://www.democracydocket.com/cases/utah-congressional-redistricting/

Related Posts

Utah Congressional 3 Race

John Mulholland

HB 300 – Vote by mail changes

John Mulholland

HB 267 – Public Sector Labor Union Amendments

Brad Daw

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *