Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judicial Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary advances bill to loosen some judicial-conduct restrictions; opponents say it politicizes courts
Summary
HB 169 would allow judges and judicial candidates to attend partisan events, accept endorsements and—if the law later permits—make partisan speeches or solicit funds; the committee advanced the bill 6–3 amid state bar and civic opposition citing constitutional and canons-of-conduct concerns.
The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced House Bill 169 by a 6–3 vote after a hearing that pitted the bill’s sponsor, Representative Tom Mallett, against organized opposition from the State Bar, judges’ groups and civic organizations.
Representative Mallett described HB 169 as a short statute that would permit judges and judicial candidates to attend partisan events and accept endorsements, and—if future law allows partisan labels—to engage in partisan activity such as giving speeches or soliciting funds. He said the change would reflect Montana’s small‑town political culture and quoted a sitting Supreme Court justice’s comment arguing that some restrictions in Canon 4 are unnecessarily strict in rural contexts.
Opponents, including Bruce Spencer (State Bar of Montana and the Montana Judges Association) and the League of Women Voters, said HB 169 would inject partisan politics into the courts, erode public confidence and run contrary to centuries-old canons. John Marshall and other witnesses warned of constitutional problems, citing Article 7, Section 9(2) on compensation and warning that the change could chip away at existing limits on judicial solicitations.
Sponsor Mallett said the bill is forward-looking and, if the law changes to allow partisan labels, the statute would let judges participate in partisan activities without risking sanctions. After testimony and questions, the committee advanced HB 169 6–3; Senator Emmerich will carry the bill on the floor.
