Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Injunctions Court Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor seeks to codify higher standard for court orders that compel action; civil‑liberty groups oppose
Summary
House Bill 7 15 would define a heightened test for mandatory preliminary injunctions that order a government or party to act immediately. The ACLU and trial lawyers’ group opposed the changes, saying they would constrain judicial discretion and make it harder to obtain time‑sensitive relief, including some constitutional claims.
Representative Bill Mercer explained that House Bill 7 15 responds to recent case law and seeks to clarify the standard Montana courts should apply to mandatory preliminary injunctions — the orders that compel a party to take affirmative action before a full adjudication.
The proposed section defines a mandatory injunction standard that requires a showing ‘‘that the law and facts clearly favor the applicant’s position’’ and that without an injunction "extreme or very serious damage will result that is not capable of remedy through compensation." Mercer said the language follows Ninth Circuit precedent the Montana Supreme Court discussed in a recent ruling.
Opponents included the ACLU of Montana and the Montana Trial Lawyers Association. The ACLU said the change would constrain judicial flexibility and make it harder to get urgent relief in cases involving constitutional rights. The trial lawyers’ group urged the committee to avoid duplicative language in the bill and to keep the court’s ability to balance multiple criteria; it warned that the cumulative changes could make timely injunctive relief unattainable.
Mercer said the bill does not affect prohibitory preliminary injunctions, which preserve the status quo, and that mandatory preliminary injunctions are already treated as disfavored in federal precedent; his bill would only codify that stricter standard in state law. The committee heard from opponents and asked for a drafting tweak to remove duplicative language; the sponsor said he would work on an amendment. No final action was taken.
