Source: https://www.statecourtsguide.com/guide/montana/
Timestamp: 2020-03-28 21:42:26
Document Index: 129666207

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 7', '§ 8', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 3']

State Courts Guide Montana - State Courts Guide
The two candidates who receive the highest number of votes are placed on the nonpartisan general ballot.
The candidate who receives the highest number of votes is elected to the Montana Supreme Court.
A judicial nomination commission shall provide the Governor with a list of candidates for appointment to fill any vacancy on the supreme court or any district court and to provide the chief justice of the supreme court with a list of candidates for appointment to fill any term or vacancy for the chief water judge or associate water judge pursuant to 3-7-221.
Montana CONST. art. VII § 7
Montana CONST. art. VII § 8
Montana Code Ann. § 13-14-111
Montana Code Ann. § 13-14-117
Montana Code Ann. § 13-15-507
Montana Code Ann. § 3-1-1001
Montana News Montana Supreme Court halts some court proceedings during shelter-in-place order MTN News - KPAX-TV
Reality Check: Marsy's Law would expand protections for crime victims, opponents worry about defendant's rights - Channel3000.com - WISC-TV3
Virus Cases Grow in Montana as Gallatin Sees Most Illnesses - U.S. News & World Report
North Dakota Supreme Court disallows evictions during coronavirus pandemic - Grand Forks Herald
MT Supreme Court rules W.R. Grace workers can pursue claims - NBC Montana
As Coronavirus Hits Hospitals, Ugly Specter Of Euthanasia Raises Head - The Federalist
Affordable Care Act is critical tool in combating disease - Helena Independent Record
Court bars immigration arrests for feds - Montana Free Press
1 of 3 Montana Men Convicted of Double Homicide Files Appeal - U.S. News & World Report
Author: William L. Saunders Jr.
From the Montana Supreme Court comes a potential challenge to the United States Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (“Citizens United”). The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision ruled, 5-4, that corporations’ and labor unions’ independent spending in elections is political speech and does not corrupt the political process; therefore, a ban on such spending included in section 203 of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (“BCRA”) could not survive strict scrutiny under the First Amendment.
On the last day of 2009, Montana’s Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Baxter v. Montana,1 making it the first high court to permit physician-assisted suicide. “[W]e find nothing in Montana Supreme Court precedent or Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy,”2 stated the court. “We also find nothing in the plain language of Montana statutes indicating that physician aid in dying is against public policy. In physician aid in dying, the patient—not the physician—commits the final death-causing act by self administering a lethal dose of medicine.”3 Therefore, under Montana’s consent statute4 “a terminally ill patient’s consent to physician aid in dying constitutes a statutory defense to a charge of homicide against the aiding physician when no other consent exceptions apply.”