Utah’s top Republican legislative leaders have announced that lawmakers will not be convening a veto override session this year after Gov. Spencer Cox stopped six bills from becoming law.

“Even when our perspectives differ, we appreciate the governor’s willingness to find common ground as we build an even brighter future for our great state,” Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, and House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said in a prepared statement issued Thursday.

“After careful consideration, the Legislature has decided not to convene a veto override session,” they said. “We will focus on constructive dialogue and thoughtful policymaking during the interim to find the best path forward that benefits all Utahns.”

Among the most controversial bills Cox vetoed — and was perhaps one that could have had the best chance of a veto override —  was SB296, a bill that would have given the governor and the Legislature the power to appoint the Utah Supreme Court’s next chief justice every four years.

Currently, the state’s highest court’s five justices elect their own leader.

It was one of a handful of bills seeking changes to the state’s judiciary, which has clashed with Utah lawmakers. Republicans’ have expressed frustration with recent court rulings and they want to have more legislative influence over how the state’s top court functions.

Along with SB296, there were several other bills that legal professionals across the state decried as threatening the judiciary’s “independence and integrity.” But after Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Matthew Durrant met with lawmakers during the 2025 session, legislative leaders announced a deal with the judiciary that they would abandon three controversial bills — including one that would give legislators a say in judicial retention elections — and instead only proceed with passing SB296.

However, despite that deal, Cox decided to veto SB296, saying it went too far by requiring the state’s chief justice to be reappointed every four years. He wrote in his veto letter that the decision was “mine and mine alone,” and that no one from the judicial branch asked him for the veto.

“I admit it is very tempting to sign this bill and assure that the Chief Justice would need to stay in my good graces to retain his or her position,” Cox wrote. “Knowing the head magistrate of our state’s highest court would have to think twice before ruling against me or checking my power is difficult to reject. I also recognize that refusing power is not en vogue these days and may be seen as weakness. But just because I can, doesn’t mean I should.”

At the time of Cox’s veto, Schultz and Adams said the move “undermines that good-faith compromise” between the Legislature and judiciary that ultimately led to lawmakers abandoning the other bills, and the Judicial Council and Utah State Bar taking a neutral position. They promised to “work with our chambers to determine the best path forward.”

Ultimately, however, they opted not to override.

Another controversial bill that Cox vetoed was SB37, which would have rerouted property tax revenue for schools into the state’s general fund. Education leaders opposed the bill, arguing it would be a form of “money laundering” that could divert money away from education.

Cox, at the time of his veto, said it was a matter of “public trust,” accounting problems, legal issues and sending the wrong message to educators about Utah’s commitment to public education.

Then, on the last night he had to either sign or veto bills passed during the legislative session, Cox vetoed four more bills, including:

• SB197, a bill that would have phased out the state’s Circuit Breaker property tax relief program for low-income seniors and indigent residents. Cox argued that the bill, while having “well-intentioned goals of reforming and streamlining property tax relief programs,” would risk “cutting off the most vulnerable of Utah’s” growing senior population while saddling counties with administrative burdens.
• HB306, a bill that would have made Utah the first state in the country to allow vendors to receive payment in gold or silver from the state. Cox expressed concerns that the bill faced problems that made it “operationally impracticable.” Plus, he worried that a “specific entity offered to fund the bill, which could jeopardize the required competitive process in the bill.” Cox didn’t name the entity in his veto letter, but The Salt Lake Tribune reported that in order to get the state’s new transaction system up and running, about $147,000 would be paid for by private donors, and Ivory said the money would come from Kevin Freeman, who was a member of the state’s gold working group and author of the 2023 book “Pirate Money.”
• HB315, a bill that would have allowed breaking a tie among three or more candidates in elections for midterm vacancies in municipal offices through a “game of chance.” Cox pointed to language in the Utah Constitution that explicitly prohibits the Legislature from authorizing “any game of chance.” Cox said he vetoed the bill “out of an abundance of caution to avoid creating potential legal issues.”
• SB106, a bill to appropriate $10,000 to create a trade commission between Utah and Ireland composed of six legislators and five appointees from the Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity. Cox said he was wary of creating more boards and commissions in statute, urging lawmakers to “not go backward” on their efforts to reduce the number of boards and commissions below 400. He also expressed concerns about creating a trade commission for a specific country when others, which are more significant trade partners for the state, don’t receive the same treatment.

Though legislative leaders announced they won’t be convening a veto override session, there’s still a likelihood that the Legislature will convene a special session in coming weeks.

Cox has indicated that he intends to call a special session sometime in May. In his veto letter, he said he’d signed several bills “with the understanding that they will be amended in a special session.”

Those included HB263, a bill focused on election transparency that county clerks had urged Cox to veto, but the governor wrote the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Norm Thurston, R-Provo, had “reached an agreement” with election officials to make some “important changes.”

Cox also agreed to sign HB356, a bill requiring some counties to elect district-based council members rather than at-large members, but with the expectation that lawmakers would make changes in a special session to avoid “unintended consequences,” although he did not specify what those might be.

During that special session, Cox also said he wants the Legislature to repurpose $3.5 million it had set aside as part of Utah’s bid to keep the Sundance Film Festival, which opted instead to move to Colorado.

“Again, more to come soon in a special session,” Cox wrote.

That special session call, however, has not yet been announced. A request for comment to the governor’s office was not immediately returned Thursday afternoon.