DSCC and MT Dems Applaud Montana Supreme Court Decision Striking Down Four Voter Suppression Laws

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, March 27, 2024

CONTACT
press@montanademocrats.org

Helena, MT – In a victory for Montana voters, the Montana Supreme Court struck down four voter suppression laws. The decision upholds a lower court ruling, protecting Election Day registration and ensuring young voters, Native American voters, and voters with disabilities don’t face unconstitutional restrictions.  

“Today’s decision reaffirms Montanans’ constitutional right to participate in our democracy. The DSCC and our partners will continue fighting back against Republicans’ voter suppression tactics and working tirelessly to protect Americans’ voting rights,” said Christie Roberts, DSCC Executive Director. 

"Today's decision is a tremendous victory for democracy, Native voters, and young people across the state of Montana. While Republican politicians continue to attack voting rights and our protected freedoms, their voter suppression efforts failed and were struck down as unconstitutional. We’re going to keep working to make sure every eligible Montana voter can make their voices heard at the ballot box this November," said Executive Director of the Montana Democratic Party Sheila Hogan.  

Key points from the decision: 

• The Court affirmed the District Court’s finding that HB 176—which eliminated election day registration (“EDR”) — is unconstitutional. 

  • “The record shows that more than 70,000 Montanans have utilized election day registration to vote since 2005 and that many electors would be disenfranchised without the availability of election day registration.”

• The Court affirmed the District Court’s finding that HB 530, § 2— which curtailed ballot collection assistance — is unconstitutional.

  • “HB 530 takes away the only option to vote for a significant number of Native Americans living on reservations. Thus, it impermissibly interferes with the right to vote.”

• The Court affirmed the District Court’s finding that SB 169—demoting student IDs to “secondary” voter IDs — is unconstitutional.

  • “Excluding student IDs from the list of acceptable photo IDs imposes a burden on student voting and the Secretary has not established that it is necessary for any legitimate government purpose, much less that it is more important than the right to vote.”

• The Court also affirmed the District Court’s finding that HB 506—which prohibited an absentee ballot from being issued to an under-18 elector who would be 18 by election day — is unconstitutional. 

  • The Court concluded that the law’s distinction between qualified voters who turn 18 shortly before an election and those who do not is arbitrary, so HB 506 is “not reasonable.”

###