On November 3, Montana voters will decide something rare in American politics: whether to write into the state constitution that judicial elections must remain nonpartisan. The constitutional referendum, known as CI-132, shares the ballot with a hard-fought state Supreme Court race — together putting Montana's nonpartisan judicial election system at the center of the nation's battle over court politics.
In June's primary, Flathead County District Judge Amy Eddy edged fellow Flathead County judge Dan Wilson by fewer than 8,000 votes out of about 270,000 cast. Because they were the only candidates, both advanced to a November 3 rematch for the seat of two-term Justice Beth Baker, a swing vote on the seven-member court who has often sided with her more liberal colleagues.
CI-132 says just one thing: "Judicial elections shall remain nonpartisan." The citizen-initiated measure, filed in August 2025 by the group Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts, gathered more than 100,000 signatures — well above the 60,241 valid signatures required — and qualified for the ballot in August. Montana has elected judges on a nonpartisan basis since 1935, roughly 90 years. If voters approve the amendment, switching to partisan judicial elections would require another constitutional amendment approved by voters.
The referendum was born from a string of moves by the legislature. During the 2025 session, lawmakers introduced more than a dozen bills aimed at weakening nonpartisan judicial elections. A new law allowing political parties to contribute to judicial candidates took effect this year. A bill to require partisan judicial elections passed the Senate but died in the House. Attorney General Austin Knudsen also tried to rewrite the measure's ballot language; the state Supreme Court ruled it misleading and restored the original text.
The American Civil Liberties Union has contributed $2.1 million to the CI-132 campaign, making it the largest donor. The ACLU is spending $5.5 million on Supreme Court races this year in Michigan, Montana and North Carolina. Nine retired Montana Supreme Court justices, including former Chief Justice Mike McGrath, have endorsed the measure, and the Kalispell Chamber of Commerce has backed it as well.
Republicans are pushing the other way. State Sen. Barry Usher, who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, argues voters deserve to know candidates' core beliefs. The state GOP passed a resolution in April urging a no vote, warning the amendment would "cement a progressive judiciary" by blocking candidates from stating their party affiliation.
The fight has been building for years. The Montana Supreme Court recently struck down laws restricting abortion and limiting voter registration on Election Day, and upheld a landmark climate ruling finding the state violated residents' constitutional right to a clean environment by permitting oil, gas and coal projects without regard for global warming. Eddy served as a fill-in justice in the abortion case, joining the majority that found the restrictions violated privacy rights in the state constitution.
Wilson has openly branded himself a "constitutional conservative" and spoke at a GOP event in February. Introducing him, state GOP chair Art Wittich said Republicans "have to do something and say something about the leftward tilt of our court." Eddy, who was appointed to the bench in 2015 by then-Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat, has refused party money, saying accepting it "undermines the public's trust that the judicial branch can be impartial."
Roughly two dozen states are electing high-court justices this November, and Montana ranks among the most intense contests. Last year, a Wisconsin Supreme Court race drew a record-shattering $100 million-plus; the liberal majority it preserved went on to strike down an abortion ban and throw out GOP-favoring legislative maps. Spending won't reach those heights this year — no single seat is seen as that decisive — but interest groups are already positioning for bigger races in 2028.
Montana's referendum and its judicial showdown will be the clearest test yet of how much longer the "nonpartisan" label can hold in America.