Connect with us

Montana

Senate leader says Montana judges are doing such a great job, they need more investigating • Daily Montanan

Published

on

Senate leader says Montana judges are doing such a great job, they need more investigating • Daily Montanan


Being confused by government is an American birthright.

That’s where journalism comes in — to explain the process and the procedure.

But even I can’t tell you what, exactly, happened at a recent legislative audit committee meeting, and from the sounds of others on the committee, they may have been equally flummoxed by Montana Senate President Jason Ellsworth, a Republican from Hamilton.

Here’s my summary:

Advertisement

During a meeting last Wednesday, Ellsworth appreciated the legislative auditing staff’s work so much he couldn’t accept it.

Ellsworth thinks that the “vast, vast, vast majority” of judges in the state work hard and make great decisions.

He even believes that the majority of complaints filed against judges at the Judicial Standards Commission are frivolous.

But he just can’t accept that the commission can function on its own without the approval or oversight of the Legislature. And in an odd and contorted meeting last week, he got fellow Republicans to go along with not approving a Legislative Audit Committee report that, according to Ellsworth, did a 100% correct job in its totality of reviewing the Judicial Standards Commission. (The committee deadlocked 6-to-6, an unusual, but not unprecedented outcome.)

To attempt summarization here, which could give you the mistaken impression that I understood Ellsworth’s position completely, the legislative auditors had opened his eyes to the fact that the judiciary is a separate branch of government, not beholden to the expectations of any political party.

Advertisement

The audit process is laid out in state law, so Ellsworth and Republicans’ disapproval of the report is largely symbolic because the audit happened and was released regardless. The deadlocked vote was merely another display of petulance by Republicans who have registered their dissatisfaction of the judiciary in numerous ways throughout the past few years, including seizing emails of the judiciary and then not giving them back, despite orders to do so.

But, you know, in case anyone was wondering: The Republicans are mad at the judiciary.

Still.

During the meeting, Ellsworth didn’t gin up outrage so much as confusion, as he had repeatedly tried to explain his rationale, and attempted a parliamentary trick of using a substitute motion, which had members scurrying to find their rulebooks and one representative to ask for a parliamentarian like a burning man would request water.

“It’s established in our rules. We would need parliamentarian … it’s just an alternate motion. But per our rules, it’s a non-debatable motion,” Ellsworth said, trying to cut off any conversation.

Advertisement

Rep. Emma Kerr-Carpenter, D-Billings, asked for some clarification, which didn’t go well.

“I’m not asking for debate, just clarification from legal counsel, who is our de facto parliamentarian, about what this actually does,” she said.

“It’s a non-debatable motion. So the rules are the rules are the rules. I made it because I sat on rules committee,” Ellsworth said.

How ironic is it that Ellsworth, who has been a one-man vendetta against the judiciary because they are following the law, would chastise another member of the Legislature with the “rules are the rules” when that’s exactly what the audit report found the judges to be doing — following the rules?

He insults the people of the state who judiciously decided that they wanted their judges and courts to be beyond the reach of garden-variety politics.

Advertisement

Ellsworth seems to forget that for the first century of Montana politics, the judiciary was never far from the reach of rich corporations and the politicians who could manipulate the courts. He forgot that one of the copper kings, F. Augustus Heinze, was said to have more lawyers on staff than geologists. Or that citizens had to rise up in 1911 and 1913 to demand a ballot and initiative process to get around a court system that had been corrupted by the political system.

The audit that Republicans asked for showed that next to Wyoming and Tennessee, Montana has one of the highest rates of judicial discipline in the nation, certainly something that doesn’t fit very conveniently into a narrative that Montana’s judiciary has somehow gone rogue or is beyond the reach of discipline.

The auditors found that most of Montana’s practices mirror other states, and that if there is a flaw, it’s that more information isn’t released when the members of the JSC mete out some sort of corrective action.

Ellsworth wants to convince voters that the judiciary gets to police itself via the Judicial Standards Commission, but that, too, is nifty sound bite because citizens hold two seats on the five-person commission and a lawyer also sits on it, making the judges outnumbered.

Watching Ellsworth try to twist his mangled logic into some sort of coherence on Wednesday was poor political theater as even members of his own party asked repeatedly for him to explain the motion and his rationale. One member even joked that he wanted to vote “maybe,” because he was as apparently as confused as the rest of us.

Advertisement

What we’re seeing has two problematic outcomes, though.

First, these stunts discredit the work of judges and the judiciary. Constantly questioning the judiciary’s motives, especially when politicians know that some of the court’s work must be done privately and confidentially to protect those who are vulnerable or whose privacy is not a political football, has a corrosive effect. We have heard so often that we cannot trust judges or the courts that it becomes a sort of urban legend.

Second, we’re seeing in real time what happens when politicians don’t get the answers they want — it’s apparent they’ll keep wasting our time and money investigating something that’s simply not there.

But if you don’t believe my words, then at least listen to Ellsworth’s:

“We know vast majority of complaints are not legit. But there are legit complaints. I have met a constituent with a complaint on a judge. It’s very rare because I think judges do a great job in this state. I want to be able to tell them we’re taking it serious.”

Advertisement

Yes, judges are doing a great job in this state, Sen. Ellsworth.

But, can the same be said for the Legislature?



Source link

Advertisement

Montana

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

Published

on

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’


HELENA — On Monday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen sent a letter to the City of Helena claiming the municipality is not in compliance with the state’s law banning “sanctuary cities.” The letter comes just under a month after the State of Montana launched an investigation into a city resolution on Helena Police policy and Helena’s involvement in federal immigration enforcement.

In the letter, Knudsen laid out the ways he believes the city’s resolution violated state law. The attorney general gave Helena 15 days to respond or reverse the policy. If the city does not comply, his office will pursue legal action.

“Helena’s resolution appears to contain blatant violations of this law,” wrote Knudsen.

MTN News

Advertisement

On January 26, 2026, the City of Helena adopted a resolution clarifying when and how the Helena Police Department will cooperate with federal immigration officials. The vote was 4 to 1. The Helena commission seats and the mayor are elected in non-partisan races.

In the letter, Knudsen alleges the resolution established “a broad sanctuary city policy” that seeks to protect every illegal immigrant, regardless of whether the individual had committed a serious crime or not. The state further claims the resolution gives illegal immigrants “special privileges” in plea deals and establishes a “free-for-all policy” where a police officer can request the unmasking of Department of Homeland Security and ICE officers.

Knudsen has requested that the City of Helena, in their response, specifically describe in detail how the resolution complies with Montana law, provide emails and correspondence from city staff and the commission regarding the resolution.

Helena City manager Alana Lake told MTN in a statement: “The City of Helena is aware of the issues being raised by the Attorney General’s Office and is reviewing the matter. While we cannot discuss the details of a potential legal issue, the City is committed to transparency and compliance with the law. The City takes these matters seriously and will continue to cooperate with the appropriate authorities while remaining focused on serving our community.”

City of Helena Commission Chambers

MTN News

Advertisement

Passed in 2021, Montana House Bill 200 prohibits a state agency or local government from implementing any policy that prevents employees or departments from communicating with federal agencies regarding immigration or citizenship status for lawful purposes. It also states governments must comply with immigration detainer requests if they are lawfully made.

HB 200 was backed by Republicans and passed with only Republican votes. Gov. Greg Gianforte signed the legislation into law on March 31, 2021.

Passage of the resolution by the Helena City Commission has drawn ire from conservative voices in Montana politics and on the national level.

ICE protest in Helena

MTN News

The resolution said the commission supported the Helena Police Department avoiding “committing its resources to federal action for which it has no authority,” such as entering into an agreement with the federal government to directly enforce immigration laws. Under federal law, immigration enforcement is conducted by federal agencies under the Department of Homeland Security. However, under the Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local governments can voluntarily enter into 287 (g) agreements with the federal government that allow them to enforce immigration laws.

Advertisement

The commission further supported HPD’s policy not to stop, detain, or arrest a person solely on suspected violations of immigration law, including assisting other agencies in an arrest based solely on immigration law.

DEEPER LOOK: Helena has seen a growing debate over ICE and local police involvement

In the resolution, the commission also supported an HPD officer, using their own discretion, requesting the identification and unmasking of a Department of Homeland Security Officer if the HPD officer “feels it will not be interfering with the actions of federal officers exercising their jurisdiction.”

“This adversarial relationship by local law enforcement toward federal officers itself undermines public safety and forces immigration officers to fear for their safety when they are simply carrying out their lawful duties,” wrote Knudsen.

The resolution further supports the City of Helena’s policy not to consider immigration consequences in a plea agreement with a defendant.

Advertisement
Montana state flag

Mack Carmack, MTN News

Montana state flag

The commission also supports the City of Helena not disclosing any sensitive information about any person – including immigration status, sexual orientation, or social security number – except as required by law.

“This is a restriction that directly conflicts with Montana’s prohibition on sanctuary jurisdictions, specifically ‘sending to, receiving from, exchanging with, or maintaining for a federal, state, or local government entity information regarding a person’s citizenship or immigration status for a lawful purpose,’” the attorney general wrote.

If a government is found to be violating Montana’s law banning “sanctuary cities”, the state could fine them $10,000 every five days, prevent them from receiving new grants from the state, and have their projects with the state re-prioritized. A government in violation can avoid penalties by becoming compliant with the law within 14 days of being notified of the violation.

Read the full letter from the Montana Attorney General to the City of Helena:

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Dispatches from the Wild: Montana’s wild inheritance at risk | Explore Big Sky

Published

on

Dispatches from the Wild: Montana’s wild inheritance at risk | Explore Big Sky


Steve Pearce and the future of the BLM  

By Benjamin Alva Polley EBS COLUMNIST 

If you care about hunting elk in crisp October air, floating a clear-running river for cutthroat trout, or simply taking your kids camping beneath a sky unspoiled by drill rigs, you should be outraged that Steve Pearce was ever considered to run the Bureau of Land Management. 

The BLM is the largest landlord in the West. It oversees nearly 245 million acres of public land—millions of those acres in and around Montana’s most cherished places. This land is the backbone of our elk and mule deer herds, our sage grouse leks, our pronghorn migration routes and our blue-ribbon trout streams. It’s also the stage on which Montana’s hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation economy plays out. 

Putting someone with Steve Pearce’s environmental record in charge of that land is like handing your cabin keys to the arsonist who’s always hated it. In the four months since Pearce was first nominated, it emerged that, if confirmed, he and his wife would divest from more than 1,000 oil and gas leases in Oklahoma to address potential conflicts of interest. While some senators strongly support his “active forest management” approach, he still faces opposition from groups alarmed by his record on public land transfers. On March 4, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted 11-9 to advance his nomination, despite concerns from conservation groups. 

Advertisement

Pearce’s track record is no mystery. He has consistently sided with extractive industries at the expense of wildlife, habitat and public access. He has supported opening more public lands to oil and gas drilling, weakening bedrock environmental safeguards and undermining science-based management. His votes and public statements have signaled again and again that he sees wild country as an obstacle to be overcome, not a legacy to be stewarded. 

For Montana, that posture is an existential threat. Our big-game herds rely on intact winter range and unfragmented migration corridors across BLM lands. Aggressive drilling, poorly planned roads and relaxed reclamation standards shred those habitats. Once you carve up a landscape with pads, pipelines and traffic, you don’t get solitude—or mature bull elk—back with the stroke of a pen. 

Anglers should be just as alarmed. Headwater streams and riparian corridors on BLM ground are the life support system for native bull trout, cutthroat and wild trout. A BLM director hostile to environmental safeguards is far more likely to greenlight development that increases sediment, degrades water quality and depletes the cold, clean flows our rivers depend on. 

If Pearce takes office, outdoor recreation—and the rural economies built around it—will not be spared. In Montana, hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation pump billions of dollars into local businesses, guiding operations, gear shops and main-street cafes. People travel here precisely because of the open space, healthy herds and functioning ecosystems that BLM lands help sustain. When those landscapes are sacrificed to short-term profit, we don’t just lose scenery; we lose jobs, identity and a way of life. 

This is not a partisan issue, especially in Montana. Public lands are one of the few things we truly share: ranchers who graze allotments, tribal communities with cultural ties to these places, hunters and anglers who’ve long defended habitat, and families who just want a place to pitch a tent. A BLM director should be a careful, science-driven steward accountable to all Americans—not a politician with a history of dismissing environmental protections as red tape. 

Advertisement

Montanans know what’s at stake. We’ve fought bad ideas before—land transfers, giveaway leases, rollbacks to bedrock conservation laws—and we’ve won when we stood together. Steve Pearce’s nomination should have been dead on arrival. The fact that he was even on the list tells us how vigilant we must remain. 

Our outrage must translate into action: calling elected officials, packing public hearings, writing letters and voting as if our public lands are on the line. Truly, they are. The BLM needs a director who sees these landscapes the way Montanans do: as sacred ground, not a balance sheet. 

Anything less is a betrayal of the wild inheritance we’re supposed to pass on. 

Benjamin Alva Polley is a place-based storyteller. His words have been published in Rolling StoneEsquireField & StreamThe GuardianMens JournalOutsidePopular ScienceSierra, and WWF, among other notable outlets,  and are available on his website.   

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Californians caught using ‘Montana Loophole’ to dodge supercar sales tax — and Beverly Hills is the worst

Published

on

Californians caught using ‘Montana Loophole’ to dodge supercar sales tax — and Beverly Hills is the worst


California has launched a huge crackdown on criminals buying and registering supercars outside of the state to avoid eye-popping sales tax.

Fourteen people have been charged after $20 million worth of vehicles were sourced to the Big Sky State in what authorities are calling the “Montana Loophole.”

California has launched a huge crackdown on criminals buying and registering supercars outside of the state to avoid eye-popping sales tax. Office of the Attorney General of California

The cars include a $1.8 million McLaren Elva, a Porsche 918 Spyder and a $1.26 million Ferrari F12TDF, the attorney general’s office said.

In the Golden State base rate sales tax is 7.25%. For a Lamborghini or Ferrari that can reach up to $250,000 or higher, that can mean a tax bill over $18,000. In Montana it is zero.

Advertisement

The gang, from Alameda, Marin, Santa Clara and Sacramento, allegedly dodged more than $1.8 million in taxes since 2018.

They are accused of filing false records showing the supercars were bought in Montana but then drove and kept them in California.

Fourteen people have been charged after $20 million worth of vehicles were sourced to the Big Sky State in what authorities are calling the “Montana Loophole.” Office of the Attorney General of California

The DMV has launched nearly 100 criminal investigations into similar schemes across California since 2023 and recovered $2.3 million. It says the schemes are costing over $10 million per year.

It says there are 601 fraudulently registered cars involved and the DMV and California Department of Tax and Fee Administration have reviewing all car sales made in Montana.

California AG Rob Bonta said: “When bad actors abuse legal loopholes and submit fraudulent documents to evade their obligations, the California Department of Justice will not stand idly by.

Advertisement

“Every dollar of unpaid taxes is a dollar taken from California’s roads, schools and the vital services our communities rely on.”

The DMV has launched nearly 100 criminal investigations into similar schemes across California since 2023 and recovered $2.3 million. It says the schemes are costing over $10 million per year. Office of the Attorney General of California

The AG’s office said Beverly Hills was the city with the most suspicious car sales, with 416 cases on its radar from the luxury enclave.

It also released a series of text messages from defendants in Marin County and Walnut Creek, which said: “Don’t want the state of California to know anything about this car.”

Another asked: “Before you deliver it to him can you please remove the dealer plate.” One more asked if those with Montana plates had issues, the reply was: “Not yet.”

Another defendant added: “70k saved — I can’t believe the registration lasts for five years — that’s crazy. Stupid California. Paid 3k to own a 600k car for 5 years — lol in Cali that’s like 75k for 5 years. Hella dumb.”

Advertisement

California DMV Director Steve Gordon said: “We encourage all Californians to do the right thing and register their vehicle here if they are operating it in California.”



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending