HELENA — On Thursday morning, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on one of the most prominent in a Republican-sponsored suite of bills that would overhaul Montana’s judicial branch: a proposal to establish partisan elections for judges.
Supporters of nonpartisan judicial elections said tying judges to partisan labels would damage their independence and impartiality. Those backing a change said the current system is leaving voters in the dark about the people they elect.
“The nonpartisan system that we currently have shields the judiciary from the voters with a veil of nonpartisanship,” said Sen. Daniel Emrich, R-Great Falls, who’s sponsoring Senate Bill 42.
Currently, all candidates for a judicial position – including a Supreme Court seat, a state district judgeship or a justice of the peace position – appear on a single primary ballot. The two candidates who receive the most votes move on to the general election. None of the candidates have a party label.
Under SB 42, judicial elections would be the same as elections for any other office. Candidates would file with a party and run in a party primary, and the winner from each party would move on to the general election.
SB 42 is one of 27 bills that came out of a Republican-led select committee, formed after GOP legislative leaders accused the judicial branch of overstepping its authority.
During Thursday’s hearing, Emrich said lawmakers regularly hear from voters who aren’t sure which judicial candidates to vote for. He said without cues from a party label, campaign spending – especially from outside groups – fills the void, and that SB 42 would improve transparency.
Montana Supreme Court elections have seen heavy spending in recent years, including in 2022 and in 2024, when several million dollars in outside spending was reported. Montana voters elected two justices last year: Chief Justice Cory Swanson, who received support from more conservative-leaning groups, and Associate Justice Katherine Bidegaray, who received support from more liberal-leaning groups.
Gov. Greg Gianforte endorsed a switch to partisan judicial elections during his State of the State address Monday night. During the hearing, Lt. Gov. Kristen Juras – who ran for Supreme Court in 2016 but was defeated by Dirk Sandefur – said parties have already been involved in these elections.
“Let’s align the real reality on the ground with the law,” she said.
Several bills that would have created partisan elections for judges failed in the 2021 and 2023 legislative sessions. Juras told MTN, while she wasn’t sure if the Gianforte administration had specifically testified in favor of those bills, Gianforte has long been in favor of the idea of partisan judicial elections.
Opponents of SB 42 said Thursday that they worried a switch to partisan elections would make it harder to separate judges from political battles.
“We don't want the judiciary swinging on the whims of partisanship throughout history,” said Bruce Spencer, representing the State Bar of Montana. “We want them to be a stable part of our government, because we want them to be impartial, and we want them to be free from outside influence.”
Rep. James Reavis, D-Billings, a public defender, said he was concerned that judges running under a party label would put a political light on all of their decisions, even when they don’t deal directly with political issues.
Sen. Barry Usher, R-Yellowstone County, asked Reavis whether his opposition to partisan judicial elections made sense considering the campaign spending Montana has seen.
“Do you not think, based on who’s sending those mailers and what organizations are sending those mailers, that we don't already have partisan politics with the money involved in judicial races?” Usher asked.
“As a public defender, if I have to say, ‘Well, maybe I can get you a plea deal, but I don't know, this judge might be a Republican or this judge might be a Democrat, and things might turn out differently,’ ‘I would love to have you get your divorce, but now I have to think about the judge’s politics,’ the downstream effect of that, I believe, is going to be more harmful than probably some of the campaign finance reform that we do need,” said Reavis.
When Montana first became a state in 1889, it did elect judges on partisan ballots. The Legislature switched to nonpartisan elections in 1935.
The Senate Republican caucus sent out a release Thursday morning, citing SB 42 as a way to give voters more information about judicial races.
“This bill is necessary to ensure that Montana voters are properly informed about the beliefs and affiliations of our judges and justices,” Emrich said in the statement. “Montanans deserve to know whether they are electing a judge that aligns with their values.”
Republicans also touted Senate Bill 45, another bill up for hearing Thursday. It would create a judicial evaluation commission, which would put together reports on a judge’s work and behavior, to be included in voter information pamphlets.
Senate Democrats also released statements Thursday, saying Republicans were seeking to politicize courts and that the switch to partisan elections would discourage people from running for judicial positions.
“We know Montanans want less politics in their lives, not more,” said Sen. Laura Smith, D-Helena, in a statement. “Montanans want fairness and their freedoms protected. Montanans want justice in their courts, not politics.”
