According to constitutional scholar Rob Natelson, “Montana’s [Supreme Court] may be unique for its disregard of basic standards of justice, the extent of its intervention into the state’s political life, and its high-handed use of power.” Natelson also describes the Montana Supreme Court’s rulings as “banana-republic conduct” and questions its legal competence. For all these reasons, he has concluded it is “America’s worst court.”
One elected official, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, has been suffering for bravely confronting the state court’s wrath and incompetence. Knudsen, a Republican, has become the victim of lawfare for simply doing his job — defending state laws in court. Knudsen was elected as attorney general in 2020 following service for a decade in Montana’s state House of Representatives, including two terms as speaker. Due to the Montana Supreme Court’s judicial overreach and activism, in recent years the state legislature has skirmished with the court over matters such as changing how judicial vacancies are filled (the subject of Senate Bill 140) and access to judicial email records, which had been subpoenaed by the legislature as evidence of inappropriate political activity by the justices.
As attorney general, it is Knudsen’s duty to advocate on behalf of the legislature, even if the legislature is trying to make the state supreme court more accountable and less intrusive. Not surprisingly, the court justices and their patrons in the plaintiffs’ bar strongly oppose efforts to lessen the court’s power and influence. Just as bar associations in California and other states have
