Imagine a game where the rules are secretly changed to favor certain players, and those changed rules didn’t even apply in the first place! That’s what this lawsuit alleges happened in Utah elections. A class of citizens are claiming that powerful politicians and special interests worked together to bend the rules, in order for their preferred candidates to be elected, silencing the voices of regular Utahns.

Here’s the basic story, according to the lawsuit:

A “Clique” Took Control: Plaintiffs claim that Governor Cox, Lt. Governor Henderson, former governor Michael Leavitt and other officials formed a tight-knit group that wanted to control who got elected in Utah.

The Signature “Trick”: Under Utah election law, a qualified political party has the power to decide how candidates seek its nomination and a place on the general election ballot. They can choose a primary convention process, a signature-gathering path, or both. The lawsuit argues that officials misapplied this law to the detriment of Utah voters. The Utah Republican Party (URP) uses the state’s primary convention process to nominate candidates to the general ballot, a decision enshrined in their party constitution and bylaws. The lawsuit alleges that Governor Cox, however, overstepped his authority by declaring that, despite the URP’s decision, he would allow candidates who lost at the convention a “second chance” at nomination to the general ballot if they gathered signatures. In doing so, the plaintiffs argue that Cox deliberately misapplied the law, ignored the state’s own election laws, and imposed a process on them that was never intended to apply, effectively hijacking their ability to have a representative form of government.

Sidestepping the State Convention Process: The central charge of the lawsuit is that the officials’ actions purposefully disenfranchised Utah voters. The state’s convention system, a process designed to empower local communities and ensure their voices are heard, was deliberately undermined. The lawsuit asserts that the illegal application of election law was designed to bypass the convention process and negate the votes of delegates, as shown by the fact that Spencer Cox, Deidre Henderson, John Curtis, and Derek Brown were legitimately eliminated during the primary convention by the vote of the delegates.

Silencing Dissent: Further, anyone who dared to question the system or raise concerns about the election process, the lawsuit alleges, was labeled as ‘extreme’ and silenced. This included Justice Durrant’s illegal denial of candidate Phil Lyman’s primary election challenge. In doing so, was able to obstruct justice and let the wrong be done.

It’s Not About Party – It’s About Fairness: This lawsuit isn’t about Republicans vs. Democrats. It’s about whether the process itself was fair, whether the rules were followed, and whether ordinary Utahns had a real say in who represents them.

Senate Race Impact: Key allegations indicate the above action altered a State race to the U.S. Senate.

So, What’s at Stake?

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit believe:

The election results were invalid. The alleged misuse of rules and fraudulent practices tainted the outcome, and those who were unfairly put into power should be removed.

The system needs a major overhaul. The proper rules need to be followed to ensure a fair and just election process.

Ordinary Utahns deserve a fair say. The power to choose their leaders should be restored to the people, not a select few, and not through a misapplication of rules.

This lawsuit is essentially a fight to make sure elections are fair, that the rules are followed correctly, and that everyone’s voice matters. If the plaintiffs are successful, it could dramatically change how Utah politics works.