Get an insider’s look into what’s happening in and around the halls of power with expert reporting, analysis and insight from the editors and reporters of Montana Free Press. Sign up to get the free Capitolized newsletter delivered to your inbox every Thursday.
August 1, 2024
With Donald Trump leading in swing states after debating Joe Biden on June 28 — a lead that’s shown signs of evaporating after Vice President Kamala Harris entered the race in Biden’s stead — it seemed likely the former president would turn his attention to flipping Democratic seats in the U.S. Senate.
On Wednesday, news of an Aug. 9 stop by Trump in Bozeman to campaign with U.S. Senate candidate Tim Sheehy was leaked by Montana Talks radio host Aaron Flint. On Thursday, the Trump campaign noticed the Bozeman event on its website: Friday night, 8 p.m., Brick Breeden Fieldhouse.
Sheehy is challenging Democratic Sen. Jon Tester. As in 2018, when Trump made four Montana stops to campaign for Republican U.S. Rep. Matt Rosendale’s challenge to Tester, there has been less than a week’s notice for Trump events around the country this summer. Event registration forms are usually posted five to six days in advance.
—Tom Lutey
ALMOST PRESIDENTIAL
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen is arguing that he cannot be held responsible for 41 alleged violations of professional conduct by himself or his staff because they’re alleged to have happened at work.
“The Commission lacks jurisdiction over the Complaint against the Attorney General for discharging his official duties,” says the AG’s recently amended answer to the allegations. The amended response, filed July 17, resembles arguments made by the U.S. Supreme Court two weeks earlier when the court’s conservative majority said presidents are immune to criminal prosecution for official acts.
To be clear, the 41 counts of misconduct levied against Montana’s AG are ethical in nature, not criminal.
The overarching allegation forwarded by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel is that Knudsen and members of his staff “frequently undermined public confidence in the fairness and impartiality of our system of justice by attempting to evade the authority of the Montana Supreme Court and assaulting the integrity of the judiciary and the official Justices who were duly elected by Montana citizens to make decisions.
“Because of this misconduct, the public may be led to question whether the judicial system itself is worthy of respect,” the complaint claims.
As Capitolized previously reported, the complaint alleges 41 individual violations of the Montana Rules of Professional Conduct stemming from 2021 litigation about the Legislature’s ability to subpoena judicial documents, which marked a high point in that inter-branch conflict. Many of the counts focus on a letter from the late Chief Deputy Attorney General Kris Hansen to Justice Jim Rice — who acted as chief justice in the stead of Mike McGrath during the lawsuit — that flouted a court order quashing legislative subpoenas for court documents and accused the court of interfering with legislative business.
“The Legislature does not recognize this Court’s Order as binding and will not abide it,” Hansen wrote.
The complaint alleges that “sending the Court a letter to reargue an issue, resist the ruling, or insult the judge constitutes a knowing disobedience of an obligation under the rules of a tribunal,” a violation covered under professional conduct rule 3.4, titled “Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel.”
—Tom Lutey
JUDGING JUDGES
The Senate Select Committee on Judicial Oversight and Reform is very concerned about retired judges.
In a draft letter to the Montana Supreme Court on July 29, committee members identified a half-dozen retired judges who either left office or resigned under scrutiny, have offered public opinions on various matters after leaving the bench, or have become parties in lawsuits of public interest.
“In a rural state with a limited pool of judicial officers, we understand how the ability to appoint retired judges to hear cases may be beneficial. However, we are concerned by the apparent lack of direction provided by statute or regulation to ensure proper oversight,” says the letter signed by a majority of the commission members. “By our reading, the selection, duties and supervision of retired judges appears to be at the sole discretion of a single individual, the Chief Justice, with no additional checks and balances governing the process.”
The Senate Select Committee on Judicial Oversight and Reform was created in April, shortly after the Montana Supreme Court declared that four new voting laws passed by the Legislature violated voters’ constitutional rights.
Thirty-nine laws passed by the 2021 Legislature sparked lawsuits. That session marked the first time in 18 years that Republicans controlled both the Legislature and the governor’s office, which effectively reduced the threat of a governor’s veto of laws passed by lawmakers. In cases in which the courts ruled against the new laws, Republican lawmakers alleged liberal judicial bias.
The committee wants to know how retired judges are selected to fill in for current judges. There was no indication that the retired judges named had been asked to come out of retirement as substitutes.
—Tom Lutey
