## Facts

- The Montana Constitution provides that when a vacancy occurs in the office of a Montana Supreme Court justice or district court judge, the governor must appoint a replacement “from nominees selected in the manner provided by law.”
- In 1973, the Montana Legislature created a Judicial Nomination Commission by statute to screen applicants and forward a list of nominees to the governor.
- In 2021, the Legislature enacted SB 140, signed by the governor, repealing the commission-based system and replacing it with a process allowing eligible applicants to be considered if they submitted required materials, including letters of support from three Montana adults, followed by a public-comment period.
- Petitioners (former public officials and a civic organization) challenged SB 140 as inconsistent with the constitutional provision governing judicial vacancy appointments and sought an extraordinary writ in an original proceeding before the Montana Supreme Court.
- The Montana Legislature intervened to defend SB 140.

## Issues

1. Whether petitioners had standing to challenge SB 140’s constitutionality.
2. Whether urgency or emergency factors justified the Montana Supreme Court’s exercise of original jurisdiction.
3. Whether SB 140 violates Mont. Const. art. VII, § 8(2) by abolishing the Judicial Nomination Commission and altering how judicial “nominees” are selected.

## Decision

- The court held petitioners had standing to bring the constitutional challenge.
- The court exercised original jurisdiction, finding urgency/emergency factors made the normal appeal process inadequate due to the need for timely clarity before impending judicial vacancy appointments.
- The court upheld SB 140, concluding it does not violate Mont. Const. art. VII, § 8(2).

## Legal Principles

- In Montana public-law and structural constitutional disputes, standing is applied flexibly; plaintiffs may have standing where the challenged action presents a sufficiently concrete and particularized interest in constitutional compliance.
- Under M. R. App. P. 14(4), the Montana Supreme Court may accept an original proceeding when urgency or emergency factors exist making the normal appeal process inadequate.
- Mont. Const. art. VII, § 8(2) delegates to the Legislature authority to prescribe by statute the “manner” of selecting nominees for judicial vacancy appointments; the provision does not constitutionally require a nominating commission or any particular nominating body.
- Constitutional convention history may inform interpretation, but where the constitutional text leaves a subject to “the manner provided by law,” the Legislature retains discretion to change statutory implementation over time.
- Courts assess only whether the statutory selection method falls within the constitutional delegation; policy concerns about judicial independence and the wisdom of the chosen method are primarily for the political branches unless the constitution is violated.

## Conclusion

The Montana Supreme Court accepted original jurisdiction and held that the Constitution leaves the method for selecting judicial nominees to legislative choice; SB 140’s commission-free process was therefore a permissible statutory implementation of Mont. Const. art. VII, § 8(2).


Brown v. Gianforte, 488 P.3d 548 (Mont. 2021)