The state Legislature isn’t the only body with the constitutional power to make laws in Montana. The people can, too, through ballot initiatives. The Montana Supreme Court heard arguments Friday in a case that could impact how voters pass laws from the ballot box.
The process involves proposing a law, gathering signatures to get it on the ballot, and asking voters if it should be passed during the next election. Now, that process is at the heart of a suit before the state Supreme Court.
Plaintiffs say a 2023 law passed by legislators puts unconstitutional restrictions on citizen-led initiatives. Those include a new $3,700 fee to file one, and a chance for lawmakers to weigh in on a proposal before it can gather signatures.
Attorney for the plaintiffs, Robert Farris-Olsen, told justices Friday the state said the fee is intended to “discourage frivolous and unserious proposals.”
“If that’s the intent – and that's the words from the state – this law is meant to impair the initiative process, not to facilitate it,” Farris-Olsen said.
Attorney Dale Schowengerdt spoke on behalf of business groups in favor of the regulations. He argued the new rules are intended to weed out unserious ballot proposals and avoid bombarding voters.
“It’s a great power, but it’s also a serious one,” Schowengerdt said. “And I think voter fatigue is a real issue, and I think this is a pretty modest limitation.”
Ballot initiatives are playing an increasingly important role in Montana politics. Voters in 2024 passed a constitutional amendment to protect abortion access. This year, proposals to keep judicial races nonpartisan and restrict dark money in politics are gathering signatures to make it on the fall ballot.
Constitutional law professor Constance Van Kley says whatever the justices decide, it will have implications for “direct democracy” – the power of the people to pass their own laws.
“A case that has to do with that process really gets at the reason we have a Constitution in the first place,” Van Kley told MTPR in an interview.
The justices will now debate the case and issue their opinion.
