![]() ![]() “So I think you saw a lot of legislators picking that out, whether it’s the Judicial Standards Commission or, I mean, they even had one for the district court council, and how that appropriates money in district courts. “Twenty-two different areas that even just by the Constitution, we can direct and put the checks and balances back in the judiciary,” he said. In 22 different instances in the section establishing the judiciary, the 1972 Montana Constitution assigns some deference to law or the Legislature, House Speaker Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, said last week. Republicans say it’s a matter of asserting the Legislature’s role as a check on the other branches of government and opening up the internal processes of the judiciary to public (and partisan) scrutiny. ![]() In other words, lawmakers haven’t shied away from attempts to reshape the court this session. But the new language his bill proposes reflects an argument the state attorney general made in defending a GOP-backed abortion law in court - that it’s too easy for plaintiffs to obtain injunctions in Montana. It seeks to raise Montana courts’ standards for granting injunctive relief - a court order that preserves the status quo.įitzpatrick, R-Great Falls, maintains that SB 191 has nothing to do with the number of bills that have faced constitutional challenges or injunctions since the 2021 session, several of which have generated court-ordered injunctions blocking their implementation. It’s the byproduct of a collision between a relatively static institution - the state Supreme Court, with its strong association with the Montana Constitution - and a surging, ideologically driven Republican Party that has won power in the Legislature and executive branches of state government on promises to disrupt the status quo.Īs an example: One of the Legislature’s major court bills this session, Senate Majority Leader Steve Fitzpatrick’s Senate Bill 191, currently awaits the signature of Republican Gov. It’s true that compared to last session - when debate about legislation giving the governor unilateral power to fill judicial vacancies spiraled into a broader fight about judicial transparency and the extent to which the Legislature can or should be involved in the court’s business - judicial bills have occupied less space thus far in the 2023 session, with its focus on a $2.4 billion state budget surplus and focus on a conservative social agenda.īut the inter-branch conflict is about more than any particular piece of legislation. If any political observers were tempted to think that the heat between Republican lawmakers and the Montana court system would dissipate between last legislative session and this one, they were thoroughly disproven by day 45 of Montana’s 68th Legislature. ![]() Thank you for supporting in-depth journalism in Montana. This quality reporting was made possible due in part to your contribution. Thank you for being a member of Montana Free Press. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |