Oppose HB322- An Attempt to break down our balance of power.

Testimony in Opposition to HB 322

I write to strongly oppose HB 322. This bill proposes an unjustified and harmful reduction in the number of associate justices on the Montana Supreme Court, an action that threatens the integrity of our judicial system, undermines the separation of powers, and weakens our state’s ability to uphold constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court’s Caseload is Increasing, Not Decreasing

Montana’s Supreme Court plays a critical role in ensuring that the laws passed by the Legislature comply with the Montana Constitution. In recent years, the Court’s workload has grown significantly, in part due to the number of unconstitutional bills that have required judicial review. Many laws enacted by the 2021 and 2023 Legislature have been challenged in court, with some cases still pending before the Montana Supreme Court.

It is also undeniable that the population of Montana is growing with more and more people coming to our beautiful state.

This Session, the Legislature is again considering multiple bills that infringe upon the constitutional rights of Montanans. These bills, if passed, will almost certainly lead to further legal challenges, requiring the Supreme Court to step in and protect the rights of our citizens. Now is not the time to reduce the capacity of the Court.

HB 322 Reduces Representation and Access to Justice

The Montana Supreme Court is the final judicial authority in our state, ensuring fairness and justice for all Montanans. Reducing the number of justices from six to four will limit the Court’s ability to process cases efficiently, leading to justice delayed for the people of Montana.

A smaller Court means:

• Longer wait times for decisions that impact fundamental rights.

• Increased burden on fewer justices, diminishing the quality of deliberations.

• Fewer perspectives contributing to judicial review, reducing the depth and balance of rulings.

By cutting the number of justices, HB 322 directly reduces the representation of the people in the judicial branch, weakening the checks and balances that protect Montanans from government overreach.

Violating the Separation of Powers Weakens Montana

The Montana Constitution does not provide for a reduction in the size of the Supreme Court. The judicial branch must remain independent from political interference to maintain fairness and uphold the rule of law.

By attempting to shrink the Court, HB 322 allows the legislative branch to exert undue influence over the judicial system, disrupting the balance of power among Montana’s three co-equal branches of government. This sets a dangerous precedent, creating a Court that is less capable of holding the Legislature accountable when it oversteps its constitutional authority.

Such actions mirror tactics historically used by authoritarian and fascist movements to undermine independent judiciaries, consolidate power, and erode democracy. Weakening the Montana Supreme Court in this way exposes our state to the influence of bad actors who seek to diminish the judiciary’s role in defending individual rights and upholding constitutional protections.

The Foundational Rationale for the Separation of Powers

The separation of powers is a fundamental principle of democratic governance designed to prevent tyranny, protect individual liberties, and ensure government accountability. This framework was established by the U.S. Constitution and adopted by state governments, including Montana, to balance power among three co-equal branches:

1. Legislative Branch – Makes laws (Congress / State Legislature)

2. Executive Branch – Enforces laws (President / Governor)

3. Judicial Branch – Interprets laws (Courts / Supreme Court)

This system ensures that no single branch gains excessive power or dominates government functions, preserving democratic governance.

Historical Foundations of the Separation of Powers

1. Montesquieu’s Influence (The Spirit of the Laws, 1748)

The concept was heavily influenced by French political philosopher Baron de Montesquieu, who argued that political liberty is best safeguarded when government powers are divided among separate entities. Montesquieu observed that absolute power leads to corruption and oppression, advocating for a checks and balances system where each branch could limit the others’ excesses.

2. The Framers of the U.S. Constitution (1787)

The Founding Fathers adopted Montesquieu’s theory when drafting the U.S. Constitution, designing a tripartite systems to prevent authoritarian rule:

• James Madison (Federalist No. 51) argued that "ambition must be made to counteract ambition," meaning that each branch should be able to check the power of the others.

• Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 78) emphasized the role of an independent judiciary in ensuring laws comply with the Constitution and preventing abuses of legislative and executive power.

This principle was not just about limiting government but ensuring efficiency and accountability in decision-making.

How Separation of Powers Balances and Strengthens Democracy

1. Prevents Concentration of Power & Tyranny

   • A government where all power resides in one entity (executive, legislative, or judicial) risks becoming oppressive.

   • The separation of powers ensures that no branch can dominate the others, preventing authoritarian rule.

2. Encourages Checks and Balances

   • Each branch has specific powers to check the other branches:

     • The legislative branch can pass laws but is checked by the executive’s veto power and the judiciary’s power of review.

     • The executive branch enforces laws but can be overridden by the legislature or ruled unconstitutional by the courts.

     • The judicial branch can declare laws unconstitutional but is dependent on the executive to enforce rulings.

3. Ensures Government Accountability

   • If one branch abuses its power, the others can step in to correct or limit overreach.

   • This prevents corruption, political persecution, and unilateral decision-making that could harm citizens' rights.

4. Protects Individual Rights & the Rule of Law

   • The judiciary acts as a guardian of constitutional rights, ensuring that laws passed by the legislature or actions taken by the executive comply with the Constitution.

   • Without an independent Supreme Court, citizens lose a key mechanism to challenge unjust or unconstitutional laws.

     
     

Why Weakening the Judiciary Undermines This System

• If the judicial branch is weakened, the legislative and executive branches gain unchecked power.

• Historically, authoritarian regimes target the courts first to remove obstacles to their policies.

• Reducing Montana’s Supreme Court justices (as proposed in HB 322) limits judicial oversight, making it easier for unconstitutional laws to go unchallenged.

• 
  

Conclusion: Separation of Powers Is Essential to Democracy

The separation of powers is the foundation of a functioning democracy, preventing government overreach and ensuring justice, fairness, and accountability. It is crucial to maintain a fully staffed, independent judiciary to protect the rights of the people and uphold the Constitution.

Conclusion: Protect the Integrity of the Judiciary—Reject HB 322

Montana’s Supreme Court is essential to preserving our constitutional rights, ensuring justice, and maintaining the checks and balances that keep our government accountable. Reducing the number of justices will harm all Montanans by increasing delays, reducing fairness in decisions, and making our judicial system more vulnerable to political manipulation.

I urge you to reject HB 322 and protect the independence, integrity, and effectiveness of Montana’s Supreme Court. Now, more than ever, we must strengthen, not weaken, our judiciary to ensure the fair and impartial administration of justice for all.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I am happy to answer any questions.