Ruling grants preliminary injunction against voting bills
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
News from Upper Seven Law
HELENA — Following oral argument last month, a court has ruled that the state is prohibited from enforcing several election-related bills enacted last year, including House Bill 506, which restricted newly-18-year-old voters from accessing ballots, House Bill 176, which eliminated election day registration, and Senate Bill 169, which arbitrarily changed voter-ID requirements. Montana Youth Action, Forward Montana Foundation, and Montana Public Interest Research Group (MontPIRG)—together the Youth Plaintiffs—argued that each of these laws restrict young Montanans’ right to vote, and the laws cumulatively create an even greater burden on young voters. The court agreed that the laws should be enjoined until at least the conclusion of the case and the laws will not be in effect for Montana’s primary elections in June. Specifically, in ruling on HB506 and its effect on young voters, the court stated “these voters previously had a voting avenue open to them that has now been closed by HB506 and the Court finds it is proper to enjoin this law until its constitutionality can be determined after a full review on the merits.”
In making this ruling, the court found that the Plaintiffs met the initial test of showing that the laws unconstitutionally burdened Montanans’ fundamental right to vote and the court applied its most stringent level of review—strict scrutiny—in evaluating the laws. The court also found that the Secretary of State did not present evidence of ballot fraud and that “there have been no instances of student ID- related election fraud” since student IDs have been allowed as voter identification.
In a separate motion filed yesterday, Youth Plaintiffs are seeking summary judgment from the court that HB506 is unconstitutional as a matter of law and are anticipating a trial to argue the merits of HB176 and SB169.
Rylee Sommers-Flanagan of Upper Seven Law and Ryan Aikin of Aikin Law Office represent the youth plaintiffs. The court ruling also enjoined the enforcement of HB530, which common interest counsel is challenging in the larger consolidated lawsuit.
