Montana Voters Weigh Constitutional Rule for Nonpartisan Judicial Elections

Montana voters will decide in November whether to protect the state’s nonpartisan judicial-election system in its constitution. The proposal would make the existing ballot structure harder to change through ordinary legislation, rather than immediately switching elections to a new partisan format.

The measure comes amid disputes over state court decisions and the political groups participating in judicial campaigns. Candidates currently appear without party labels in these races.

What Would Be Written Into the Constitution

Montana already conducts elections for its Supreme Court without party labels beside the candidates’ names. The proposed amendment would safeguard that approach constitutionally and change the process required for future alterations.

A vote against the proposal would not, by itself, automatically place Republican or Democratic labels beside judicial candidates. The immediate choice concerns the legal protection of the current system.

Why the Question Is on the Ballot

The debate follows sharp disagreements over decisions involving abortion, election policy and other public issues. Advocates of the amendment argue that a nonpartisan ballot structure helps distinguish courts from party elections; opponents have challenged the role that rule plays in judicial accountability.

Political parties and outside groups may still support candidates even when the candidates have no party labels. The proposal addresses the format of the elections, not the personal views or campaigning of everyone involved.

Voters Face Two Separate Judicial Decisions

In addition to the proposed constitutional amendment, voters will choose among judicial candidates under the current rules. The amendment’s effect will depend on the certified vote and the exact legal language adopted, if it passes.

References: Nonpartisan state Supreme Court elections are being put to the test in Montana