There are pretty sharp differences in the candidates running for the two Montana Supreme Court seats being contested this fall. They came out at a candidate forum in Missoula on Tuesday.
One of the big issues at the forum was campaign financing, both for this year’s Supreme Court race and for elections in general.
The candidates talked about the 2010 Citizens United case in the US Supreme Court. It allowed unlimited independent corporate spending in federal elections. The high court applied that ruling to state elections in 2012.
Sitting Justices Jim Rice and Mike Wheat disagree with that decision, but challenger Lawrence Van Dyke thinks it was the right call. Van Dyke is Montana’s former Solicitor General.
"It costs money to have information in races," Van Dyke says. "I’m not asking for any partisan endorsements, but I do believe in the free speech rights of organizations, to be able to speak on what they believe. I think it’s a huge problem when you start telling people what they can and can’t say."
Van Dyke is challenging Justice Mike Wheat. Wheat is concerned about unfettered corporate spending in campaigns.
"It is this worry about money that’s going to invade the process and overwhelm the process."
Wheat says there’s a disturbing trend of recent supreme court races in other states attracting big spending by out of state interests, and he’s worried about it coming to Montana.
"It starts pecking away at what we all want from our judiciary," he says, "which is fair, independent and impartial justice."
Sitting Justice Jim Rice mirrors Wheat’s point of view on corporate campaign finance, and his concerns about outside money influencing Montana’s Supreme Court races. Wheat says he’s long supported the state’s practice of electing rather than appointing its Supreme Court justices, because of the state’s history of dominance by corporate interests that had the power to appoint decision makers.
"That said, I think, given the very disturbing developments on the horizon, I think we'll be looking in the days ahead about whether that remains a good system," Wheat said, "given the possibility for corruption in the system or dominance by corporate interest. So we’ll be looking at that in the days ahead."
Justice Rice’s challenger is Billings Attorney David Herbert. Herbert has previously run for Wyoming’s US House Seat as a Libertarian, and on Tuesday identified himself as a Libertarian and fan of former Republican Congressman Ron Paul. Herbert is an advocate for jury nullification, in which jurors rule against laws they decide are unjust or unfair.
"Every law that has been passed in this country in the last 200 years is not fair and just," Herbert says.
"And I would certainly not enforce that unfair and just law, and unconstitutional law. I believe in the constitution. These other people believe in the rule of law which our founders, you find, were very suspicious of. "
Montana’s Supreme Court candidates spoke at a forum in Missoula Tuesday. You can listen to a recording of the entire eventon our website, MTPR.org.
