A liberal majority of the Montana Supreme Court has cleared the way for a sweeping ballot initiative backed by a coalition of liberal advocacy organizations, reversing Attorney General Austin Knudsen and allowing the measure to move forward.
In a sharply divided ruling issued Thursday, the Court held that proposed Ballot Issue 8 (BI-8) qualifies as a single constitutional amendment and does not violate Montana’s separate-vote requirement .
The decision grants proponents the ability to proceed with ballot statements and signature gathering.
The measure, supported by groups including labor unions, voting-rights advocates, and progressive policy organizations, would create a new “fundamental right” to initiative and referendum powers while imposing strict timelines on legal challenges and restricting the use of government resources to support or oppose ballot measures.
The Court’s majority concluded the provisions are closely related components of one constitutional design aimed at strengthening the people’s initiative power. Writing for the majority, the justices determined that concerns about judicial deadlines and government resource restrictions did not amount to separate constitutional amendments.
Justice Jim Rice argued that the initiative bundles together multiple constitutional changes, including new restrictions on government officials’ ability to engage in ballot advocacy. He warned that voters are being asked to approve more than just enhanced initiative rights.
Chief Justice Cory Swanson joined the dissent and raised additional concerns that the proposal alters the judiciary’s constitutional authority by imposing rigid deadlines on courts to resolve election-related litigation. Swanson also contended the measure affects the constitutional rights of future opponents of ballot initiatives, including access to courts and due process protections.
The dissenters characterized the initiative as logrolling — combining distinct constitutional issues into a single proposal — and argued voters should be permitted to weigh those changes separately.
Supporters of BI-8, including several liberal special interest groups that filed briefs backing the measure, have framed the proposal as a safeguard against government interference in citizen-led initiatives and as a way to ensure faster resolution of ballot disputes.
Opponents counter that the measure goes beyond procedural reform and restructures constitutional relationships among the branches of government.