Montana lawsuit challenges Legislature’s concealment of bill drafting talks

A watchdog and the public are suing Montana’s Legislature to disclose concealed communications with lobbyists.

A government watchdog and concerned citizens are challenging Montana’s Legislature in court to halt the concealment of back-channel communications among lawmakers, lobbyists, and stakeholders involved in drafting legislation. Legislative staff began redacting such details in September, following a court decision in favor of Republican Sen. Keith Regier, which afforded him privacy in discussions about Senate Bill 109, legislation that redrew political districts in 2023.

This lawsuit, filed in Great Falls by the Montana Environmental Information Center, David Saslav, and Kaylee Hafer, demands transparency in legislative drafting, reinstating public access to information historically stored in “junque files.” These files include exchanges among lobbyists, legislators, and others offering input during bill drafting.

Recently, all plaintiffs were denied access to unredacted junque files. “Until a few months ago, the concept of legislative privilege as a mechanism for concealing documents and communications about official legislative business, including those contained in junque files, had never been raised, considered or otherwise addressed in Montana,” the lawsuit states.

Junque files might reveal direct amendments proposed by lobbyists, such as those from oil refineries or teachers’ unions. Derf Johnson of MEIC highlighted the influence of lobbyists, stating, “There’s a pretty powerful lobbying component that knows how to work the system and basically move their issue.”

The lawsuit references original arguments from the 1972 Montana Constitution drafters for maintaining transparency in legislative activities, including Delegate Daphne Bugbee’s assertion on the right of Montanans to know legislative motives, “There is really no justification for keeping this process a secret from the people.”

In June, Regier successfully resisted demands to disclose his communications about state service commission districting. These districts, passed along party lines, were alleged to be gerrymandered for political advantage, sparking voter lawsuits. However, state officials maintained that legislative and gubernatorial approval were the only relevant public matters.

District Judge Christopher Abbott sided partially with Regier, withholding non-governmental communication from disclosure. Abbott noted, “If a legislator knows that undertaking factfinding or proposing a bill will down the road require them to fork over every scrap of paper… that potential chills legislative activity.”

By September, legislative attorneys devised a waiver for lawmakers to exercise legislative privilege, avoiding public disclosure of certain communications. Despite ongoing lawsuits, this waiver allows legislators to maintain privacy regarding their interactions with lobbyists and stakeholders affected by proposed bills.

The ongoing legal battles explore the balance between legislative privilege and public transparency, a debate unresolved in Montana’s higher courts.


Read More Montana News

Share the Post:

Subscribe

Related Posts