Montana Lawyers Warn Against Political Influence on Judges

In 2025, Montana’s Republican lawmakers introduced thirty‑four bills aimed at reshaping the state courts. They wanted to change the method for picking judges, allow political contributions to judicial campaigns, and set up a commission to evaluate judge performance. Many of these proposals faced strong opposition. In the end, most of the bills failed to pass.

Marc Racicot, who once served as Montana’s attorney general and governor, spoke out against the effort. He said the supporters of these changes show no respect for the Constitution. He added they do not grasp the role of courts in our system. He warned that ignoring the courts’ independence puts the whole government at risk.

Steve Bullock, another former attorney general and governor, shared similar concerns. He pointed out that legislators often brush off warnings from lawyers that a bill might be unconstitutional. After the bill becomes law, they react with anger toward judges or the entire court. Bullock noted they rarely pause to consider that they were told about problems beforehand.

Patricia Cotter, a retired justice of the Montana Supreme Court, offered a different angle. She said only about two or three percent of all cases involve hot‑button political issues. Yet those few cases attract the majority of public attention. Cotter observed that lawmakers then use those rulings to claim the court is acting improperly.

Dana Christenson, a senior U.S. district judge, highlighted other signs of politicization. He noted a drop in enthusiasm for jury service and pointed to recent Senate hearings on federal judge nominations as evidence. Christenson urged lawyers and judges to keep politics out of their work. He called on them to resist anyone who threatens judicial independence. He reminded everyone that children are watching, so adults should lower the tone, critique decisions when needed, and never undermine the court’s independence