Montana Must Defend Judicial Independence

— April 17, 2025 —

In Montana, we don't take kindly to power grabs. We believe in checks and balances, in local control, in keeping our institutions accountable to us, not to parties or strongmen.

The escalating attacks on our judiciary, both nationally and here at home, should set off alarm bells for every Montanan who believes in the Constitution.

Trump has made it clear. If given the chance, he will refuse to abide by court decisions he disagrees with. Not since Andrew Jackson has a president openly threatened to defy the courts in this way.

The last time that happened, it led to one of the darkest chapters in American history.

We must not repeat that mistake.

Montana's Proud Defense of a Nonpartisan Judiciary

Montana has always taken the independence of the judiciary seriously. Our state constitution explicitly guards against the politicization of our courts. Judicial races in Montana are nonpartisan for a reason: justice must not be beholden to any political party.

Even Montana Supreme Court Chief Justice Cory Swanson, a former Republican candidate for Attorney General, has warned clearly: "The role of the court is not to make policy, it is to fairly interpret and apply the law without political interference."

In Montana, whether you wear a red hat or a blue one, there’s a deep understanding that the judiciary must remain independent if our system is going to work.

We expect our elected officials to respect court rulings—win or lose. That’s what it means to live in a constitutional republic. That’s what it means to trust the rule of law.

What Happens When Presidents Defy the Courts?

History gives us a chilling example.

In the 1830s, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the State of Georgia must respect the sovereignty and land rights of Indigenous nations. President Andrew Jackson reportedly scoffed, saying, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” Jackson refused to uphold the decision. State militias moved in. Thousands of Native Americans were forcibly removed from their ancestral homes, leading to the Trail of Tears.

Back then, the binding nature of judicial review wasn't yet firmly settled. After the Civil War—and especially following Ex parte Milligan, where the Court ruled against Lincoln’s wartime military tribunals—the expectation became clear: Presidents abide by court rulings. Period.

For more than 160 years, this principle has held. Republican presidents. Democratic presidents. Popular presidents. Unpopular ones. All have accepted that even when the Court rules against them, the executive branch must comply.

Until now.

Just last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered federal authorities to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an individual unlawfully deported. Instead of immediately complying, reports indicate that Trump and his advisors discussed defying the order outright from the Oval Office.

This isn’t a theoretical debate. If a president can ignore the courts when it’s convenient, what protects you? What protects your property, your rights, your freedom?

In Montana, we know that the strength of a system isn’t measured when everyone agrees—it’s measured when the system holds during conflict. When it enforces the rights of those without political power. When it restrains those who would act above the law.

The respect we've had for judicial review for the past 160 years has preserved peace in Montana and across the country. It's why we have a functioning civil society instead of chaos.

Montana’s Courts Are Under Attack, Too

The threats aren’t just national. Right here in Montana, we’ve seen organized efforts to politicize judicial elections, strip courts of their authority, and intimidate judges who make rulings some politicians don’t like.

These aren’t harmless political games. History teaches us what happens when courts lose their independence and the rule of law collapses. Chaos follows.

When executive power goes unchecked by the courts, the result isn’t greater freedom, it’s lawlessness. We saw it after Andrew Jackson defied the Supreme Court. We saw it during Reconstruction when federal protections collapsed and civil rights protections were fought for town by town because local courts were compromised.

Wherever judicial authority is undermined, injustice—and often violence—take root.

Montana has always valued a fair and nonpartisan judiciary for precisely this reason: it protects every citizen, regardless of political affiliation, from arbitrary government power.

Chief Justice Cory Swanson’s warning to maintain an impartial judiciary is a warning drawn from history. It’s a call to action we can’t afford to ignore.

If we allow Montana’s courts to be captured or overridden by partisan forces, we risk losing the peace, stability, and fairness that have allowed our state—and our nation—to thrive. We also risk sliding into a future where rights exist only when politicians permit them and where the powerful face no consequences at all.

Montana’s judiciary isn’t perfect. No system is. But it remains one of the last lines of defense for fairness, freedom, and the rule of law.

We cannot afford to let it fall.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Montanans must double down on the separation of powers. We must elect people who respect the constitutional role of the courts, not those who seek to bend them to political will. We must focus on policies and principles—not party loyalty.

We must insist that the rule of law remains stronger than any one individual, no matter how loud their rhetoric or how deep their political following.

If a president or a governor, or any executive can ignore the rulings of the courts, we're no longer a constitutional republic.

We've become something else entirely.

If you believe Montana must defend its courts, share this post. Organize in your community. Speak out. Democracy isn’t self-sustaining. It’s ours to defend.