Latest news with #EricSeidle
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
The Montana Supreme Court of discord
The Great Seal of the State of Montana in the Supreme Court (Photo by Eric Seidle/ For the Daily Montanan). The recent dust-up within the Montana Supreme Court has proven to be quite interesting – and somewhat disappointing. By a 4-3 majority, the court awarded attorney fees to the plaintiffs in Montana Environmental Information Center and Earthworks vs. Office of the Governor. This is certainly not an unheard-of occurrence; other cases have reached the same conclusion. In reaching this conclusion, the majority reversed the district court's denial of attorney fees. That's not unusual either. Here's what distinguishes this case in the eyes of the dissenting justices: The majority had the temerity to offer guidance in what has been a confusing and inconsistent area of the law. Here's the skinny: The plaintiffs asked the governor for copies of a wide range of documents. After about five months of dilly-dallying, the governor denied the request. The plaintiffs sued, relying on the right-to-know provision of the Montana constitution (Article II, Section 9). They won. When the plaintiffs filed to recover attorney fees for their litigation, district court denied the request. In the view of the district judge, the governor's Office 'did not act out of bad faith, indolence, or unreasonable delay.' This denial was at issue before the Supreme Court. In the 61 pages of ensuing verbiage, one nugget shines. It's a simple, single-sentence statute: 2-3-221. Costs to prevailing party in certain actions to enforce constitutional right to know. A person alleging a deprivation of rights who prevails in an action brought in district court to enforce the person's rights under Article II, section 9, of the Montana constitution may be awarded costs and reasonable attorney fees. In statutory interpretation, the word 'may' carries clear meaning: The district court has discretion to decide whether to award the costs and fees. In order to reverse that decision, the Supreme Court must determine that district court abused its discretion. At the onset of the majority opinion, Justice Laurie McKinnon wrote, 'When a party succeeds in litigation based on a right to know request, it has performed a public service in ensuring that Montana's government is appropriately transparent and accountable to the people.' This statement follows precedent in at least two other cases (Bozeman Daily Chronicle v. City of Bozeman Police Department (1993), Associated Press, et al. v. Montana Department of Revenue (2000)). So far, so good. On this basis, the majority took the next step: 'A presumption towards awarding fees when a plaintiff vindicates their constitutional right to know follows naturally in the context of the right.' This is what set the dissenters' teeth on edge. Justice Jim Rice's dissent said the majority 'abandons actual law and backfills the vacuum with its own creation made of whole cloth.' I don't see it. In fact, Justice James Jeremiah Shea pointed out that 'both this Court and the United States Supreme Court have long recognized, on a number of occasions, the necessity of creating frameworks to guide the discretion of lower courts in applying statutory awards of attorney fees.' Well, reasonable people can (and should) disagree. What puzzles me was Justice Rice's swerve into accusing the majority of bias against a Republican administration and partisan weaponizing of the law. Where did that come from? When Justice McKinnon took the unusual step of responding to Rice's 'highly inappropriate and unprofessional attack,' Chief Justice Cory Swanson weighed in. His self-proclaimed in-depth reading of Shea's dissent found 'nothing offensive or personal in his criticism.' I find that artificially ingenuous and doubly repugnant. McKinnon wrote a well reasoned majority opinion that furthers our understanding of the right to know. It deserves respect rather than ridicule. MEIC Earthworks right to know decision
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Montana Supreme Court: When the public's right to know is vindicated, attorneys fees should follow
The entrance to the Montana Supreme Court (Photo by Eric Seidle/ For the Daily Montanan). In a sprawling, 61-page decision that had about as many opinions attached to it as members of Montana's highest court, a majority of justices said that the State of Montana, specifically the governor's office, should pay attorneys fees in a public documents fight between the office and groups wanting more information about a mining executive. However, the particular details before the court were not whether a former mining executive should be permitted to lead a mining company after his former company was found to be a 'bad actor' by state law. Instead, the Montana Supreme Court weighed in on when the government should pay attorneys fees in the public records dispute. In a fractured mix of majority, concurring and dissenting opinions, at least four justices agreed that Lewis and Clark District Judge Christopher Abbott should have given attorneys fees to the Montana Environmental Information Center and Earthworks, which had sued Gov. Greg Gianforte for documents related to Phillips S. Baker, Jr., and permitting documents related to both Hecla Mining and the Montanore mine. The MEIC argued that the state had not enforced its 'bad actor' provision against Baker, the Hecla CEO, because of his leadership in a company that went went bankrupt, while leaving millions of dollars of mining mess to be taken care of in perpetuity by the state. MEIC and Earthworks, which won the public documents fight against the governor, also asked for attorneys fees because they brought the lawsuit under the Montana Constitution's right-to-know provisions. In the state, judges have discretion to award attorneys fees when private groups or individuals are successful in vindicating constitutional rights, like obtaining public documents. Previously, the Montana State Supreme Court had been reluctant to recommend a checklist of conditions that have to be met in order to award attorneys fees, instead relying on the judgment of district or trial court judges. However, a majority of the court decided to take up the issue, saying that more guidance was necessary for judges, something a minority, including Chief Justice Cory Swanson, balked at. The dissenting opinions centered on the idea that judges should still have latitude to decide on a case-by-case basis, and that if the Legislature wanted to mandate attorneys fees, it should be done in law. Justice Laurie McKinnon wrote the majority opinion, with James Jeremiah Shea, Katherine Bidegaray and Ingrid Gustafson concurring. Justices Jim Rice and Beth Baker, along with Swanson were in the minority. The majority pointed out in the case that the governor's office had employed a 'novel' legal theory that Abbott debunked, but even so, 'the court found the governor's office shirked its clear legal duty to MEIC's request.' 'When a party succeeds in litigation based on a right to know request, it has performed a public service in ensuring that Montana's government is appropriately transparent and accountable to the people,' the majority opinion said. The justices reasoned that if constitutionally protected rights are meaningful, then litigation — or the ability to take the government to court — must be accessible. 'The result of the district court's order — that MEIC prevailed and undeniably performed a public service, yet it is denied attorney's fees — is dissonant with the foundational purposes of Article II, Section 9, and actively disincentivizes citizens from enforcing that right,' the majority opinion said. 'For citizens to be able to enforce the provision against the government, litigation must be accessible; for litigation to be accessible, there should be a basic presumption towards awarding attorney's fees when the party seeking to enforce the right to know has prevailed on its merits.' The majority shifted the blame back to the Montana Supreme Court, saying the state's provisions for awarding attorneys fees had created a 'vacuum of necessary guidance,' and the majority wanted to more fully develop the advice. Abbott had determined that because Gianforte had not acted in bad faith, and because attorneys fees would essentially be borne by Montana taxpayers, he decided not to award attorneys fees. However, the court said the calculus Abbott used — whether there was evidence of bad faith — shouldn't be the deciding factor in the right-to-know cases. 'When a plaintiff prevails on the merits of a right to know dispute, it means that, whether in good faith or bad faith, the government pushed back against the constitutional presumption and, in doing so, violated a fundamental right,' the opinion said. 'But because we have previously neglected to suggest a presumption — or even a preference — for awarding fees in this context, even plaintiffs with an exceptionally strong case and an egregious violation must carefully consider whether it is worth the risk of winning the documents but losing fees.' The court's opinion also said it was taking up the matter because it's essential for courts and citizens to understand fundamental or Constitutional rights. 'We seek to provide basic guidance that works to encourage and strengthen the people's exercise of a fundamental constitutional right. This presumption does not eliminate judicial discretion, but rather structures it to reflect the constitutional emphasis on transparency,' the ruling said. 'This presumption is not a novelty imagined at the whims of this court; it is part of the fabric of the right to know which has been errantly lost to an unboundedly deferential standard that allows for results fundamentally at odds with the Constitution.' Leaders from both Earthworks and MEIC cheered the decision, saying the decision was a win for residents who want to keep tabs on government officials. 'Montana's Constitution guarantees the public the right to know what government is up to. Justice only works when every person has the ability to oversee their government,' said Anne Hedges, executive director with MEIC. 'This decision will ensure the public can continue to access government documents and will prevent abuse when the government officials refuse to comply with the constitution.' MEIC Earthworks right to know decision
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Montana reaches six months of unemployment below 3%
The Walt Sullivan Building where the Montana Department of Labor and Industry are housed (Photo by Eric Seidle for the Daily Montanan). With an unemployment rate of 2.7% in March, down from 2.8% last month, Montana has now seen six straight months of rates under 3%. The governor's office and Department of Labor and Industry continue to praise the low seasonally adjusted unemployment rate, the third stint below 3% since the Federal Reserve began measuring the rate in the 1970s. Coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic, Montana saw an unemployment rate below 3% for two full years from October 2021 to October 2023. It ticked up slightly from then to 3.1% in December of that year, before slowly ticking down. March marked the 45th consecutive month of unemployment at or below 3.4%. 'For six months, Montana's unemployment rate has remained below 3%, with nearly two job openings for every unemployed worker,' Gov. Greg Gianforte said in a press release. 'Through our efforts to lower taxes and remove red tape, we've have created an environment that empowers entrepreneurs and businesses to invest and create good-paying jobs for Montanans across our state.' The unemployment was 1.5% lower than the national rate, which came in at 4.2% in March. The state's unadjusted unemployment rate of 3.0% ranks 5th in the U.S. The state said the labor force in Montana decreased by 572 workers last month. Data shows the state has added 1,500 payroll jobs over the last month. Forty-four of the state's counties currently have unemployment rates below 4%, and 19 of them have seen net job gains over the last year year, according to data from the Department of Labor and Industry. Gallatin County has seen the largest drop in employment over the last year with 348 fewer people employed this year compared to last. Missoula county, however, has seen the most growth with 860 additional people becoming employed. Unemployment rates remain higher on the state's seven Native American reservations – ranging from a non-seasonally adjusted rate of 4.7% on the Flathead Indian Reservation up to 13.1% on Rocky Boy's reservation. All seven reservations have seen net job decreases in the last year.
