[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6100437,"mediaKeyId","2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1","parentId",2813596,"title","House Judiciary adopts amendment to Senate Bill 42 and concurs in bill revising judicial election rules","audioSeconds",465,"startMs",9613000,"endMs",10078000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1&start=9613&end=10078","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1/thumbnail_9613000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6100437/Montana/House-Judiciary-adopts-amendment-to-Senate-Bill-42-and-concurs-in-bill-revising-judicial-election-rules","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100437-55bc5698a9f2486fcb973dbf82eb18ee/orig.mp4?Expires=1771025091&Signature=jUqGx-7bO9hHgi5xqeZpnRw-Lsegodhh0oGBgCkRZvIVpPW~tlG7~RxzCOJBlYzUT9RPZbaw8QkWeUEwMOL-J6tFMCMOrEUyKgwv~~-dMb8Lq4lBm6X1la58Kf~wP~kHm7pYW3TOsnjUTE8CHPlhdQ5UMjLgnnnfEzr0zUBwF0q3ya8yQK1xpyqFtSgyQHgpydqVZIpTPDjdwSoYeT-6tlB~w6A-flZ1QVc8HWEyuLxb9-StYapXfgqTEAJf5xNIjAtOCL7s6DAjGn1vIVHB2eCO~qGKp3AC4-q8jRwmMQuijp4HZsJOLaCeFLWO9BfDkkumFyn3Kh0NuTELwvKjoA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Montana Legislature","date","2025-03-28T00:00:00Z","article","Ms. Weiss of Legislative Services summarized Amendment 1.6 to Senate Bill 42 for the committee, saying the amendment would insert several new sections addressing independent candidates in judicial primaries. The amendment would require that if an independent judicial candidate is the only independent candidate in a primary, that candidate receive at least 5% of the total votes cast for the successful candidate with the least votes in the most recent primary for that office. The amendment also includes filing-exemption provisions and signatures/deadline exemptions for certain independent judicial candidates.

Committee members asked procedural questions about how independent candidates would appear on ballots and whether local election administrators would implement separate ballots; Ms. Weiss said the amendment does not amend the existing election statutes that specify ballot mechanics and that implementation details would follow election-administration practice.

Representative Deming moved the amendment; the committee adopted Amendment 1.6 on a roll-call vote (12-8). Following amendment adoption, the committee voted to concur in Senate Bill 42 as amended; the concurrence vote succeeded by the same margin (12-8).

The record shows committee discussion addressed potential ambiguities in ballot presentation and how an independent candidate would be listed in different primary ballots, but the amendment does not itself change the underlying primary-ballot statutes.

The committee’s concurrence sends Senate Bill 42, as amended, forward under House procedures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Judiciary - Friday, Mar 28, 2025 07:59 - 11:29","oneSentenceSummary","Ms. Weiss of Legislative Services summarized Amendment 1.6 to Senate Bill 42, which would add rules for independent judicial candidates in primaries, including a 5% vote floor for a sole independent candidate in the independent primary.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MT, Montana","taxId",77694,"location","Montana","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100440,"Committee advances bill to create judicial-branch investigation panel with $400,000 appropriation",1518,2358000,3876000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1&start=2358&end=3876","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1/thumbnail_2358000.jpg","/articles/6100440/Montana/Committee-advances-bill-to-create-judicial-branch-investigation-panel-with-400000-appropriation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100440-7c52c75ac4cf1b134da3d502ca4cefe9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771025091&Signature=h9iTLFTkogcr-KCpN2~dXRBJIhBJpMbSP9wwoT4wQSbQQO3OaDf2t2R2UKoU-M7Uj7rWskImgq8-reagfZRj9fkq9AAuYUmVyNoAgSAVYIBXZF4~qYEKPjpRl~P3pHsoqy8jUZwgB3gCiy87GPdTtGMLLIcDC7bIWf2m7sPsR9ovTmwOwPzlieBYTLybJY3spbOv5G7UBlAJtIi-T5bPeNtY04ZMqcAc-kufrJPlnOnh2cPS3K5RzluaJsPCOOsVfhMwMRGG3uDrTiwyoslMvXUKPjfS07Zkfprw6sMpaR5pUhGG7zDvnB7NgZbjjMYxct-DCIB1HS3Vb9yyXP2U5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Lucas Schubert opened the hearing on House Bill 8-40, saying the bill would create a nine-member interim committee — five House appointees by the speaker and four Senate appointees by the president — to investigate the independence and quality of district court and Supreme Court rulings. Schubert told the committee the bill includes an appropriation of $400,000 for the biennium \"for the maintenance of this interim committee and for the dissemination of information\" and that the panel would terminate in 2028.

Opponents, including the Montana Trial Lawyers Association and the State Bar of Montana, urged the committee to reject the proposal. Al Smith testified the bill is a partisan project and that there is no public demand for such a committee. Bruce Spencer of the State Bar called the bill a potential separation-of-powers problem and described it as a \"fishing expedition.\" Spencer said judges should not be investigated for disagreeable legal opinions and noted existing appellate processes and judicial discipline channels.

Committee members asked the sponsor about committee composition and whether designating partisan appointments would be appropriate; Representative Schubert said the bill does not specify partisan makeup and that he would consider amendments to balance appointments if that would garner support.

During executive action the committee voted to pass House Bill 8-40 out of committee by roll call; the committee tally was 12 in favor and 8 opposed. The bill will move forward for further House consideration.

Witnesses raised questions about the bill’s undefined terms (\"independence\" and \"quality\") and the broad scope of investigatory authority; the sponsor argued that open language would let the interim committee study issues fully and recommend reforms.

House Bill 8-40 now proceeds from committee with the stated $400,000 appropriation and a 2028 termination date noted in the bill text.","House Bill 8-40 would create a nine-member interim committee to investigate the independence and quality of district and Supreme Court rulings. Sponsor said the bill includes a $400,000 biennial appropriation for the committee’s work and public dissemination of findings; opponents called it a fishing expedition and a separation-of-powers risk.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100446,"Montana House Judiciary advances bill allowing party labels, top-two for Supreme Court races after contested hearing",2182,175000,2357000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1&start=175&end=2357","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1/thumbnail_175000.jpg","/articles/6100446/Montana/Montana-House-Judiciary-advances-bill-allowing-party-labels-top-two-for-Supreme-Court-races-after-contested-hearing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100446-97fdf076ada4a7c56faa8b522baa7dda/orig.mp4?Expires=1771025091&Signature=iAOvJvWlIeVUc9d3fWbQuShKP3YhSLLavb0sWh0JixgPlGhdo2hoMKND6YyZLDyLA0ZtHYuWwTPd3FUN52UfLINCyNc11g9S2sQET4XX3grbvgA34NYFiG1rSntj-uhsqDZsyR0lGl5k058AKkC2MZpZUbAJWtR7Ev1I1xmtLMBZa160gBUghxbYsAelq2kBFiCDOR-Jx1zA~DlqJ2fDBx64OlsL~2lY-JNKn9XkRTtsd5PInpQVHiGpQnvE6q5-laaWQVUBFzENcc9Mnukushz6fWlb3VVoFQenc-kwPyKv514~FweFOG-~KM67Z0bYQZlX3lRTDWwA3M1sZeSRdQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Brad Barker opened the hearing on House Bill 8-38, saying the bill would let Supreme Court candidates identify with any party or run nonpartisan and would advance the top two primary finishers to the general election.

Opponents — including the Montana Trial Lawyers Association, the State Bar of Montana, legal scholars and multiple citizens — urged the committee to reject the proposal, arguing it would inject partisan pressure into the judiciary and erode public confidence. Al Smith of the Montana Trial Lawyers Association said judges \"should be free from political pressure,\" and asked the committee to table the bill.

Bruce Spencer of the State Bar of Montana testified that the bar opposes the bill and that allowing party labels would not reduce campaign spending or improve voter information. \"Partisan elections will significantly erode our notions of a fair and independent judiciary,\" said a spokesperson for a constitutional convention delegation who testified in opposition. David Wilson, an Helena attorney with nearly 40 years’ practice, told the committee he opposes the bill because party labels would undercut the appearance and reality of impartiality.

Supporters and the bill sponsor told committee members the measure is voluntary and framed it as providing voters more information. Representative Barker said the bill \"is a may, not a shall,\" and that candidates would still be able to run without party labels.

During the hearing, witnesses cited the Judicial Code of Conduct and Montana's constitutional history. Opponents pointed to Canon 4.1 and to long-standing nonpartisan practice; several referenced the convention debates and the decision after the 1930s to keep judicial elections nonpartisan.

In executive action, the committee recorded a roll-call vote on House Bill 8-38. The committee vote was 12 in favor and 8 opposed; the bill passed House Judiciary and will move on in the legislative process.

The hearing record shows extensive public opposition and questions about how voluntary party identification would interact with judicial ethics rules and election mechanics. The bill sponsor and some committee members said they view the bill as one of several reforms to address concerns about the courts.

House Bill 8-38 now proceeds from committee to the next stage of House consideration.","House Judiciary advanced House Bill 8-38 to the full House after a hearing in which dozens of opponents warned the change would politicize the state Supreme Court. The bill would let candidates list party affiliation (including a voluntary \"nonpartisan\" option) and send the top two primary finishers to the general election.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6100431,"House Judiciary tables House Bill 506 after amendment vote",494,9106000,9600000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1&start=9106&end=9600","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2813596-fd9e3bf7cfe7434caec6ad527dd2d9a1/thumbnail_9106000.jpg","/articles/6100431/Montana/House-Judiciary-tables-House-Bill-506-after-amendment-vote","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6100431-f3393a3bd2c27242b3774982a42be074/orig.mp4?Expires=1771025091&Signature=RNQXPCOe3LBv229UIqlLRywSreomf6Oudd5FTOhWRN6GBc3uWjwEkvc-C74OHxDV0BwyvHuG6PKKbjPb-wNAeKW2eIsYbQ6wQKUHV-uVE6i6Ntc4lLkyXeMznrq9TSlujcjATH4ByUinJHH2gedddiRWZ6OQIZjVVglL54A~uqZ7r99qy6l5W5AQNl1P4wVcjKWOvGXGRBh1k4M90s2Zx3w4Mq7oo~Tg4LHohF4XNuJH8U247TdFVqhvR7bv9cgDjFDgZktruqpFAohY6wLRY~INP79uEwxtcgkoEdK~wm30UcXF8GOwlhN25qtXcYOJMDSTfRs7WSvuocNJTqfpwA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","In executive action the committee considered House Bill 506 and associated amendment proposals. Ms. Weiss of Legislative Services explained Amendment 0.004, which would have revised the structure of a nominating committee and added the chief justice as an ex officio member, required the governor to appoint from a list of nominees, and provided for retention elections.

Representative Mallette moved to table the bill. The committee conducted roll-call votes on the proposed amendment and on the substitute motion to table. Amendment 0.004 failed on a roll-call vote (8 in favor, 12 opposed). A later substitute motion to table House Bill 506 passed on a roll-call vote, 11 in favor and 9 opposed; the bill is recorded as \"on the table.\" The record shows prior confusion during an earlier table vote attempt but the final outcome is that HB 506 was tabled by committee action.

The chair’s clerk recorded the final tally as 11 yes and 9 no; the bill remains on the table in House Judiciary pending any further action.","During executive action, the committee voted to place House Bill 506 on the table. Prior amendment votes failed; a subsequent motion to table passed by roll call (11-9).","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House Judiciary adopts amendment to Senate Bill 42 and concurs in bill revising judicial election rules

Committee advances bill to create judicial-branch investigation panel with $400,000 appropriation

Montana House Judiciary advances bill allowing party labels, top-two for Supreme Court races after contested hearing

House Judiciary tables House Bill 506 after amendment vote