House committee tables bill that would cut Montana Supreme Court funding

The Montana House Appropriations Committee on a voice vote tabled House Bill 883, a measure that would reduce funding for the Montana Supreme Court operations by a proposed $18,000,000, a figure the bill sponsor said constitutes roughly 36% of the court’s operations.

The committee’s action came after several opponents warned the cut would degrade court services and threaten judicial independence. Mac Alpin, court administrator for the judicial branch, testified in opposition and said the reduction would “severely cut the budget of the judiciary enough to make us incapable to accomplish the statutes and the constitutional mandate.”

Bruce Spencer, representing the State Bar of Montana, told the committee that the proposed reduction “completely abrogates all the hard work” used to build current court operations and stressed the court’s administrative functions extend beyond the justices to information technology, payroll, policy support for youth courts, and programs handling child abuse and neglect cases. Heather O’Loughlin of the Montana Budget and Policy Center also registered opposition and urged members to “do not pass.”

Sponsor Representative Schubert defended the bill as an exercise of the Legislature’s power of the purse, saying the reduction was intended to signal displeasure with what he described as repeated judicial overreach. He told the panel the measure targets Supreme Court operations and, as drafted, would not permit taking money from district courts.

Committee members pressed the sponsor for detail on how the cuts would be implemented. Representative Kiel and others questioned what staff or programs would be cut and noted that many parts of Supreme Court operations — technology, scheduling, boards and commissions, and court-improvement programs — are interlinked and difficult to pare back without affecting services. The sponsor suggested staff reductions, including law clerks or other attorney-staff positions, but did not provide a specific reduction plan.

During executive action, Vice Chair Mercer moved a due-pass recommendation; Representative Fitzpatrick offered a substitute motion to table the bill. The substitute motion to table carried by voice vote, with the chair announcing it “passes unanimously with those present,” effectively halting further committee consideration for now.

Why it matters: Committee members and court advocates warned that the proposed cut would reduce the court’s ability to maintain electronic case management, provide judicial and legal regulation functions, and administer child welfare and youth court programs. The committee’s decision leaves intact the current judiciary budget while signaling legislative skepticism about the sponsor’s approach.

What’s next: The committee tabled HB 883; no further action was recorded in this hearing. Any future movement would require the committee to remove the bill from the table or reintroduce similar language.