Montana Republicans say they want “judicial reform.”

That’s cute.

What they want is a loyalty program for judges. Punch seven partisan ballots, get one Supreme Court free.

Let’s be blunt: This isn’t about transparency. It isn’t about efficiency. It isn’t about “facts not feelings.” It’s about turning the Montana Supreme Court into a subsidiary of the state GOP.

Not reform. Capture.

Not balance. Control.

Not democracy. Something uglier.

If you can’t win the argument, change the referee

For decades, Montana has elected judges in nonpartisan races. Why? Because the moment you slap an “R” or a “D” next to a judge’s name, you invite voters to treat courtrooms like cable news panels.

Republicans now say voters “deserve more information.” Translation: They want a shortcut. A partisan brand. A jersey.

Because nothing says “impartial justice” like campaign mailers that read: “Judge Dan Wilson — endorsed by the party trying to change the Constitution to give him more power.”

If you want a red court, just say so. Don’t call it “reform.”

At a recent GOP dinner, Supreme Court candidate Dan Wilson drew applause as party leaders pledged to “counter the left tilt” of the court. The Montana GOP chairman openly said the party needs to counter liberal groups in judicial elections.

Read that again.

They’re not pretending this is about neutrality. They’re organizing to take the bench.

When a judge gets a standing ovation at a partisan dinner, that’s not independence. That’s an audition.

The “Big Sky Blueprint” — or Big Sky Smokescreen?

Meanwhile, “Americans for Prosperity” — which sounds like a Rotary Club pancake breakfast but is actually a Virginia-based nonprofit bankrolled by Charles and the late David Koch network — is carpet-bombing Montana with glossy door-hangers about our alleged “decline.” According to them, regulations killed logging, courts are run amok, and government is the villain in every fairy tale — which is convenient, because when your donors prefer fewer rules and friendlier judges, every problem starts to look like a regulation..

Facts are sacred. So let’s talk facts.

From 1940 to 1960 — the era they romanticize — CEO pay was stable. It actually dropped during WWII and barely crept up in the 1950s. The CEO-to-worker pay ratio hovered around 25-to-1.

Today? Roughly 300-to-1.

Back then, labor unions were strong. Taxes on the wealthy were high. Regulation wasn’t a dirty word — it was how we built a middle class.

They don’t want the 1950s economy. They want the 2020s CEO bonuses.

AFP says judges are blocking the will of the people. But here’s the inconvenient Montana truth: If you don’t like the judge assigned to your case, you can substitute them out with a one-sentence motion.

One sentence. Judge gone. New judge assigned. Rotating system. No judge shopping.

You don’t need a constitutional amendment. You need a piece of paper and a pen.

If your problem is one judge, use the rulebook. If your problem is the rulebook, you’re not seeking fairness — you’re seeking power.

Forty years in the trenches

I’ve practiced law in Montana for more than 40 years. I’ve lost plenty of cases. Won a few. I never once lost because a judge was a Republican or a Democrat.

I didn’t even know what they were.

I lost because the facts weren’t on my side. I won because they were.

That’s how it’s supposed to work.

Will a Republican judge decide your divorce differently than a nonpartisan judge?

Will your child custody case turn on party registration?

Will your property dispute hinge on which primary ballot the judge once pulled?

Unlikely.

What will change is perception. And perception is everything in a court of law.

Justice must not only be blind — it must not wear a campaign button.

But if the GOP’s project succeeds, every controversial ruling becomes a partisan talking point. Every opinion becomes a litmus test. Every judicial race becomes a proxy war.

That’s not strengthening the judiciary. That’s weaponizing it.

When politicians start picking judges like cabinet members, the Constitution becomes a suggestion.

They’re even fighting a constitutional initiative to preserve nonpartisan judges.

Think about that. Citizens want to protect nonpartisan courts. The Republican party wants to defeat that effort.

If your plan requires changing the Constitution to win elections you can’t otherwise win, maybe the problem isn’t the Constitution.

The real goal

This isn’t about education reform.

It isn’t about timber.

It isn’t about pension structures.

It’s about power.

Courts are inconvenient when they enforce constitutional limits. Courts are inconvenient when they say, “No, Legislature, you went too far.”

That’s not activism. That’s separation of powers.

A court that never tells the legislature “no” isn’t conservative. It’s captive.

Montana’s judiciary isn’t perfect. No branch is. But turning it into a partisan branch of the ultra-right Republican Party is not reform.

It’s a power grab in a black robe.

It’s shameful.

It’s undemocratic.

And it’s a problem.

Montana doesn’t need red courts or blue courts. We need courts that are colorblind.

Hands off our Constitution.

Hands off our courts.