Candidates Differ Over Meaning Of ‘Nonpartisan’ Montana Supreme Court

A long-running debate over the role of politics in Montana’s courts has become the central issue in this year’s Supreme Court race between two Flathead County judges.

In the nonpartisan race to replace retiring Justice Beth Baker, candidates Amy Eddy and Dan Wilson have both stressed the need to keep politics out of the courtroom, though the two have approached that goal differently.

Partisan backing in nonpartisan elections is a trend that political science expert and University of Montana professor Rob Saldin said has been intensifying the past several years, matching Montana’s increasingly Republican voting record.

“For the long time, it was less clear that making a judicial race line up along partisan lines would be a significant advantage to one candidate or the other,” Saldin said. “But as Montana has become more and more clearly Republican, I think Republicans probably rightly so see an advantage to making it clear to voters which candidate the party is supporting.”

Both candidates running for the state supreme court registered as nonpartisan, but Wilson has received endorsements and donations from Republican officials.

Eddy, 50, said she gained a deeper understanding of the Montana Supreme Court when she worked as a lawyer in private practice. Former Gov. Steve Bullock appointed Eddy as a judge in the 11th Judicial Circuit in 2015 and she has been re-elected twice since then. As a district court judge in Flathead County, she has heard hundreds of cases, including many asbestos-related cases from Libby.

Now she’s running for the Montana Supreme Court.

“We’re in a time where Montanans really deserve to maintain a fair and independent court as an independent branch, not as an extension as one of the political parties,” she said.

If elected, Eddy will serve with two justices who recently endorsed her, Justices Katherine Bidegaray and Ingrid Gustafson. Bidegaray defeated Wilson, Eddy’s current opponent, in 2024.

The endorsements from the two current and six retired state justices left Eddy “almost overwhelmed” by the support. But she said she appreciates the support of other groups, such as the Democratic and Republican Parties in Montana, while ultimately rejecting it.

Eddy has drawn a hard line on politics in the courtroom. To back up that position, Eddy said she has refused all endorsements, donations and support from both parties. Eddy has also made it a point not to appear at party-sponsored forums or speak at party- affiliated events. “That’s really the definition of nonpartisan,” she said. “You do not associate yourself with the political parties, you don’t run under a political party label. It’s not a very high bar. We have not wanted our judges to be held captive by political parties.”

Still, political scientist Jessi Bennion noted some political-leaning groups have backed Eddy’s candidacy.

“If you look at Amy Eddy, she’s supported by Forward Montana, the Montana ACLU, Wild Montana — organizations that typically support Democratic candidates. And then on the other side, [Dan] Wilson, who is being supported by more Republican leaning organizations in the state, like the Montana Chamber of Commerce.”

Wilson maintains his goal to be a nonpartisan candidate and justice as well, despite receiving $20,000 from the state Republican Party and another $11,000 donation from the Park County Republican Central Committee.

Wilson, 60, isn’t a stranger to running for the Montana Supreme Court. He ran for a seat in 2024, ultimately losing to Bidegaray by eight points. Despite that loss, Saldin said name recognition from the 2024 run may actually give Wilson an advantage, drawing in votes from familiarity.

A fourth-generation Montanan, Wilson refers to himself as a constitutional conservative. To him, that judicial philosophy means making decisions and rulings that don’t rely on modern-day political leanings.

Wilson has his own endorsements from groups like the nonprofit organization Montana Stockgrowers Association, the Montana Chamber of Commerce, the Montana Association of Realtors and the Montana Mining Association.

He described serving on the Montana Supreme Court as the most meaningful way to serve both the public and the law. He said part of running for state supreme court means letting a judge’s rulings “speak for themselves.”

Wilson said his rulings reflect a steady, deliberate approach aimed at getting each decision right.

“The litigants deserve the judge’s full care and attention without any desire on the judge’s part to see a particular outcome,” Wilson said. “Except that it be right, follow the law and be obedient to the constitution.”

It’s not guaranteed that partisan backing may actually draw in more votes or secure a victory on either side, but it’s a practice that Saldin said has its pros and cons.

“The partisan cue can really make a huge difference,” Saldin said. “This is one of the reasons why you traditionally see a lot lower turnout for nonpartisan elections ... because people feel like they don’t know and aren’t in a position to cast an informed vote, so they just skip it.”

But Saldin said that kind of partisan pressure can also undercut the nonpartisan intent of the race. “The extent that you have forces trying to place that partisan label on it does kind of cut against the whole idea behind having these races be nonpartisan,” Saldin said. “You lose the idea that these races should be thought about in a nonpartisan manner and that it should be the character of the candidates.”

Whether or not the party support will have a larger impact on the judicial campaign will not be clear until Election Day, Nov. 3.