Montana

Following a new law giving the state's governor the sole power to fill mid-term judicial vacancies, former Montana Supreme Court Justice James C. Nelson calls for the implementation of a merit-based judicial selection process to keep Montana’s courts free from partisanship and outside influence.

The pandemic has affected our civil justice system in many ways, yet perhaps the most important role access to justice entities can play in the near future is to advocate for the retention of remote access systems for court appearances as well as for the delivery of legal and self-help services.

At the direction of the Montana Legislature, the Montana Law and Justice Interim Committee met last month with the objective of finding ways to improve the Montana family court and domestic relations proceedings. To facilitate their analysis, the committee plans to examine three issues in particular: the current cost and efficiency of the Montana family court system, family law models successfully used in other states, and measures needed to improve the administration of justice and the non-adversarial resolution of family court matters in Montana.

A pro-business group known as the Montana Growth Network funded a radio ad attacking a supreme court candidate’s position on the death penalty. The candidate asked his opponent to denounce the ad, as the code of judicial conduct recommends when third parties make false statements about candidates, but she responded that she would need to do extensive research to determine the ad’s factuality.

In Sanders County Republican Committee v. Bullock, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a Montana law that restricted political parties from endorsing or contributing to judicial campaigns. The Atlantic reports their disfavor with the Ninth Circuit’s decision, maintaining the statute acted to “protect the integrity of [Montana’s] nonpartisan judicial elections” and “stood as a bulwark against the corroding effect of money's influence on judicial integrity.”

In a 2-1 ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit blocked a Montana state law barring political party endorsements of judicial candidates.

The state Republican Party moved for a preliminary injunction against enforcing a law barring political parties from endorsing, contributing to, or making expenditures on behalf of nonpartisan judicial candidates. Lawyers for the state argued that the law promotes “a compelling interest in making sure its elected judiciary is fair and impartial.”

A district court judge may have violated the state’s code of judicial conduct by writing a letter soliciting campaign contributions for a fellow judge who is running for a state supreme court seat. If a complaint is filed and found to have merit, the judge could be subject to disciplinary action ranging from admonishment to removal from the bench.

A district court judge struck down a ballot referendum scheduled for the June primary that called for the election of supreme court justices by district rather than statewide. According to the judge, the measure would alter the constitutional qualifications for service on the supreme court.

Voters challenged a June 2012 ballot referendum calling for supreme court justices to be elected by district rather than statewide. The attorney for those challenging the measure asserts that the measure adds a requirement that supreme court justices live in the district from which they are elected and that legislators cannot alter such requirements by referendum.