Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campaign Finance Judicial Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heated hearing on bill to let political parties donate to judicial candidates
Summary
House Bill 39 would repeal the statute barring political parties from contributing to judicial candidates; proponents say it would increase transparency and reduce out-of-state PAC influence, while tribal leaders, the State Bar and constitutional historians warned it risks partisan labeling of judges and undermines public confidence.
Representative Tom Millett opened House Bill 39, a request of the Senate Select Committee on Judicial Oversight, seeking to repeal MCA 13-30-5-231 so political party committees could directly contribute to judicial candidates. Millett and proponents argued the change would make party involvement transparent and "level the playing field" against independent, often out-of-state expenditures. Senator Barry Usher (vice chair of the Senate Special Select Committee) said party committees currently route funds through outside PACs, obscuring donor origin, and that allowing party contributions would make donor sources visible on COPP reports.
Opponents included tribal representatives and legal and historical experts. Patrick Yawaki (Blackfeet and Rocky Boy tribes) said partisan donations threaten judicial impartiality and could shift decisions away from the Montana Constitution and law. Alyssa Snow (Fort Belknap tribes) added concerns about the potential impact on incarceration and sentencing disparities in Native communities. Bruce Spencer, representing the State Bar of Montana, urged a "no" vote, arguing that direct party contributions would tag judges with partisan labels, erode public confidence and contradict Canons of Judicial Conduct. Remote witness Evan Barrett, a retired constitutional historian, urged rejection on historical and policy grounds, saying Montana’s 90-year nonpartisan tradition should not be upended.
Committee members pressed both sides on whether judges’ prior partisan activity predicts bias, whether both parties could contribute, and whether the repeal would substantially increase money in judicial races. Bruce Spencer said courts have upheld limited restrictions on party contributions to judges, while noting that Citizens United limits options on independent-expenditure bans. Representative Millett cited COPP aggregate limits and estimated party-committee aggregate contributions would add roughly $84,150 per Supreme Court election and $2,250 per district-judge election, which he characterized as modest relative to independent spending.
Next steps: Sponsor Millett urged the committee to pass HB39 out for floor debate. The hearing drew the session’s most ideologically divided testimony among the bills heard and yielded prominent legal and tribal opposition that the committee will weigh as it considers amendments and executive action.
