$1.25
your homegrown newspaper January 8, 2025
Vol. 21, No. 17
In court, media outlets argue for access to legislative records
Duck drive pg. 6
The records of communications between legislators, staffers, lobbyists and others had been public for more than three decades before a change last year. By Tom Lutey, Montana Free Press
Pageant winner pg. 8
Sports pg. 16
MONTANA — Concealing the back-channel communications between lawmakers, lobbyists and stakeholders when drafting bills amounts to the Legislature violating the state’s Constitution, a coalition of media outlets including Montana Free Press argued in court Friday. Appearing before District Judge John Kutzman in Great Falls, the media organizations asked for an injunction blocking the redaction of bill draft folders known as “junque files,” which contain communications between lobbyists, legislators and
FILE PHOTO
A coalition of media outlets is challenging the concealment of communications between lawmakers, lobbyists and stakeholders that happen when bills are being written.
staffers as bills are being written. Legislative staff began redacting the files at lawmakers’ requests in September, following a separate lawsuit ruling that shielded a Kalispell senator from producing evidence to be used against him in court. Legislative staff then applied that ruling broadly
to documents that had previously been considered public for more than 30 years. “Unlike a party in a civil litigation, the press is not after this information to use it in some way, in some judicial proceeding against a legislator,” attorney Kyle Nelson told the court. “They are using this information for the w w w.va l le yj our na l.net
benefit of the public, to shine a light on what the government is doing, nothing more.” The protections shielding legislators from testifying against themselves or producing evidence that does the same are intended to protect lawmakers from intimidation by the other two branches of state government,
the governor and the judiciary. Lawmakers also can’t be prosecuted for legislative acts, Nelson argued. Attorneys for the Legislature argued that prying into junque files comes close to revealing a legislator’s “preliminary mental impressions.” Attorney Brent Mead, with the Montana Department of Justice, said the practice of providing those files went too far. “What we’re talking about is the legislator’s mental impression of what they want to do with a given piece of legislation during the drafting process,” Mead said. The attorney argued that conversations with lobbyists and stakeholders while conceptualizing bills should be considered part of a lawmaker’s thought process and protected. Mead referenced a Thursday Montana Supreme Court ruling that granted the governor narrow protections, like see page 2