On Wednesday, January 15, 2025, the Daily Montanan reported that a long-standing conflict between Montana’s legislative and judicial branches escalated in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee reviewed two bills aiming to reshape the state’s judicial system, reflecting a multi-year dispute culminating in a Senate Select Committee on Judicial Oversight and Reform. This committee, comprised solely of Republican lawmakers, is proposing over two dozen bills this session, all without Democratic support.

Senate Bill 30, sponsored by Senator Tom McGillvray (R-Billings), directly addresses a 2021 legal challenge involving all three branches of government. The dispute centered on emails from the judicial branch, with lawmakers and Attorney General Austin Knudsen arguing that most Montana Supreme Court justices had a conflict of interest due to their email usage. SB 30 aims to codify the concept of “judicial necessity,” which allows a judge to preside over a case even with a conflict of interest if all other judges are similarly situated. McGillvray’s bill mandates that if other judges are available, even from lower courts, they must be assigned the case. The bill’s proponents argue it enhances public trust in the courts; no opposition testimony was presented.

Senate Bill 48, sponsored by Senator Carl Glimm (R-Kila), focuses on the handling of judicial misconduct complaints. Currently, complaints remain sealed until reviewed and forwarded for action. SB 48 proposes making all complaints public upon filing. Senator Glimm framed the bill as a First Amendment issue, arguing that the current system restricts free speech. He contends that the public’s right to know should outweigh the need for privacy in such matters.

Bruce Spencer, a lobbyist representing the Montana Bar Association and Montana Judges Association, expressed concerns. He noted that over 97% of complaints are dismissed, often due to issues related to specific cases or outcomes, which are appealable to the Supreme Court. Other lawmakers highlighted the parallel with complaints against legislators, which are publicly released upon filing, even if dismissed. Senator Theresa Manzella (R-Hamilton) questioned this disparity, noting legislators must endure public scrutiny of even frivolous complaints.

Spencer warned that publicizing all complaints could politicize the courts, undermining public trust and potentially damaging the reputations of judges. He emphasized that many states maintain confidentiality until a complaint is deemed meritorious, citing potential reasons for privacy, such as a judge’s health issues. He also argued that the bill would make Montana an outlier, lacking widespread support and serving primarily as a political tool against the Supreme Court. He clarified that once a complaint is reviewed and deemed valid, it becomes a public record.

Senator Manzella questioned the apparent conflict between the right to free speech and the confidentiality rules of the Judicial Standards Commission. Spencer acknowledged that while free speech is an inalienable right, it’s subject to limitations. Senator Glimm countered that SB 48 would position Montana as a leader in free speech, a recurring theme among Republicans this legislative session.

 

 

Source: Daily Montanan