Mt. Automobile Association v. Greel

CourtMontana Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 30, 1981
Docket81-045
StatusPublished

This text of Mt. Automobile Association v. Greel (Mt. Automobile Association v. Greel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mt. Automobile Association v. Greel, (Mo. 1981).

Opinion

No. 81-45

I N THE SUPREME COURT O F THE STATE O F MONTANA

MONTANA AUTOMOBILE A S S O C I A T I O N , BUFFALO MACHINERY COMPANY e t a l . , and MONTANA CHAMBER O F COMMERCE,

P l a i n t i f f s and R e s p o n d e n t s ,

MIKE GREELY, ATTORNEY GENERAL O F THE STATE O F MONTANA, and PEG K R I V E C , COMMISSIONER O F P O L I T I C A L P R A C T I C E S ,

D e f e n d a n t s and A p p e l l a n t s .

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING:

C o u n s e l of R e c o r d :

For A p p e l l a n t s :

Hon. M i k e G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , M o n t a n a R i c h a r d L a r s o n argued and M a r y B. T r o l a n d argued, A s s i s t a n t A t t o r n e y General, Helena, Montana $f-c..k &DL-: ".cCe0-, ~ T L ~ For spondents :

D o n a l d g a r r i t y argued, H e l e n a , Montana

For A m i c u s C u r i a e :

J a m e s G o e t z , R.C.L.U.), Bozeman, Montana James W. . Zion, (A. C L L ~ U). Hklana , M o n t a n a K e l l y A l a n J e n k i n s , (Common C a u s e ) H e l e n a , M o n t a n a

- --

Submitted: March 27, 1981

Decided: J u l y 30, 1 9 8 1

Filed : . a L S O 1980 Mr. J u s t i c e Fred J . Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t .

I n i t i a t i v e No. 85'-, Lobbyist Disclosure, (herein called

"1-85" o r " t h e I n i t i a t i v e " ) was h e l d t o be u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l

by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t .

D e f e n d a n t s , t h e s t a t e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l and t h e commissioner

of p o l i t i c a l p r a c t i c e s of t h e S t a t e of Montana, w e r e perman-

e n t l y e n j o i n e d from enforcement of 1-85. Defendants appeal-

from t h e judgment. W hold t h a t t h e I n i t i a t i v e i n p a r t i s e

u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and v o i d , and t h a t t h e b a l a n c e of 1-85 i s

s u f f i c i e n t t o c a r r y o u t t h e p u r p o s e s of t h e Act a n d , t h e r e f o r e ,

remains i n e f f e c t . T h i s o p i n i o n d o e s n o t r u l e upon t h e

a p p l i c a b i l i t y of 1-85 t o l a w y e r s , which w i l l b e d e c i d e d i n a

s e p a r a t e o p i n i o n , S t a t e Bar of Montana v . K r i v e c , Supreme

C o u r t Docket No. 81-35.

C h a p t e r 157, L a w s of Montana ( 1 9 5 9 ) , e n t i t l e d "Lobbying",

w a s e n a c t e d i n 1959 and c o d i f i e d a s s e c t i o n 43-801, e t seq.,

R.C.M., 1947, now C h a p t e r 7, T i t l e 5, MCA. The Lobbying Act

was e n a c t e d " t o promote a h i g h s t a n d a r d of e t h i c s i n t h e

p r a c t i c e of l o b b y i n g , t o p r e v e n t u n f a i r and u n e t h i c a l l o b b y i n g

p r a c t i c e s , and t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e l i c e n s i n g of l o b b y i s t s and

t h e s u s p e n s i o n o r r e v o c a t i o n of t h e l i c e n s e s . " S e c t i o n 5-7-

1 0 1 , MCA. L e g i s l a t i v e amendments i n 1965 and 1977 made

minor changes i n t h e l o b b y i n g law b u t d i d n o t a l t e r i t s

scope. S e c t i o n 3 , Ch. 248, Laws of Montana (1965) ; s e c t i o n s

1 9 , 2 0 and 21, Ch. 309, Laws of Montana ( 1 9 7 7 ) . House ill

49 and S e n a t e B i l l 233, d e s i g n e d t o expand t h e Act t o r e q u i r e

d i s c l o s u r e of t h e amounts of money s p e n t f o r l o b b y i n g , were

i n t r o d u c e d d u r i n g t h e 1979 l e g i s l a t i v e s e s s i o n , b u t were

killed prior to transmittal. House J o u r n a l , 46th ~ e g i s l a t u r e

l ~ e Appendix "A". e (~ontana 1979) ; S e n a t e J o u r n a l , 4 6 t h L e g i s l a t u r e (Montana

1979).

I n 1980, a s u c c e s s f u l p e t i t i o n e f f o r t r e s u l t e d i n t h e

placement of 1-85 on t h e s t a t e w i d e November b a l l o t . The

I n i t i a t i v e s o u g h t t o add 1 3 new s e c t i o n s and t o make numerous

amendments t o t h e e x i s t i n g l o b b y i n g r e g u l a t i o n a c t . It also

g r e a t l y expanded t h e " D e f i n i t i o n s " s e c t i o n of t h e o r i g i n a l

law i n a n a t t e m p t t o c l a r i f y t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e law a s

expanded and amended. Most of t h e 1959 law and a l l of t h e

changes proposed by 1-85 were p r i n t e d i n t h e V o t e r I n f o r m a t i o n

Pamphlet f o r t h e November 4 , 1980, g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n . The o f -

f i c a l v o t e on 1-85 was 259,698 " f o r " and 76,358 " a g a i n s t " .

On November 2 4 , 1980, a d e c l a r a t o r y judgment a c t i o n w a s

brought i n t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t . The p l a i n t i f f s a r e

a s s o c i a t i o n s which employ l o b b y i s t s , s e v e r a l i n d i v i d u a l s ,

and one s t a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ; and t h e d e f e n d a n t s a r e t h e a t -

t o r n e y g e n e r a l and t h e commissioner of p o l i t i c a l p r a c t i c e s

of Montana. An a t t e m p t by d e f e n d a n t s t o remove t h e a c t i o n

t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t was u n s u c c e s s f u l . On

J a n u a r y 2 2 , 1981, a f t e r submission of b r i e f s and a h e a r i n g ,

t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t d e c r e e d t h a t " I n i t i a t i v e No. 85 i s uncon-

s t i t u t i o n a l , n u l l , and v o i d , and t h a t d e f e n d a n t s a r e permanently

e n j o i n e d from e n f o r c i n g i t s p r o v i s i o n s . " The f i n d i n g of

u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y was based upon t h e I n i t i a t i v e ' s i m p a c t

on numerous r i g h t s : p r i v a c y , freedom of s p e e c h , freedom of

t h e p r e s s , freedom of a s s o c i a t i o n , freedom t o p e t i t i o n t h e

government, e q u a l p r o t e c t i o n of t h e laws, and freedom from

compelled s e l f - i n c r i m i n a t i o n . The I n i t i a t i v e was a l s o h e l d

t o be v o i d f o r vagueness. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t found t h a t t h e

S t a t e had n o t m e t i t s burden of e s t a b l i s h i n g a c o m p e l l i n g i n t e r e s t t h a t j u s t i f i e d t h e i n f r i n g e m e n t s mentioned above,

o r t h a t t h e S t a t e ' s i n t e r e s t c o u l d be a c h i e v e d through less r e s t r i c t i v e means. F i n a l l y , the D i s t r i c t Court held t h a t

t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y o f f e n s i v e p o r t i o n s of t h e I n i t i a t i v e

could n o t be severed because " t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e e n t i r e

m e a s u r e d e p e n d s upon t h e showing of a c o m p e l l i n g s t a t e

i n t e r e s t and a d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t s u c h i n t e r e s t may n o t b e

s a t i s f i e d by l e g i s l a t i o n more n a r r o w l y drawn."

W e a g r e e w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t t h a t 1-85 c o n f l i c t s

w i t h v a r i o u s c o n s t i t u t i - o n a l r i g h t s o f t h o s e a f f e c t e d by i t s

provisions. However, w e d o n o t a g r e e t h a t t h e r e h a s b e e n a

f a i l u r e t o e s t a b l i s h a compelling s t a t e i n t e r e s t f o r t h e

p a s s a g e o f 1-85. While w e f i n d t h a t c e r t a i n p r o v i s i o n s o f

t h e I n i t i a t i v e a r e beyond r e d e m p t i o n , t h e s t r i k i n g o f t h o s e

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Lee
106 U.S. 196 (Supreme Court, 1882)
Hazelton v. Sheckells
202 U.S. 71 (Supreme Court, 1906)
Cantwell v. Connecticut
310 U.S. 296 (Supreme Court, 1940)
Thomas v. Collins
323 U.S. 516 (Supreme Court, 1945)
Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. Merrill
332 U.S. 380 (Supreme Court, 1947)
Toomer v. Witsell
334 U.S. 385 (Supreme Court, 1948)
United States v. Rumely
345 U.S. 41 (Supreme Court, 1953)
United States v. Harriss
347 U.S. 612 (Supreme Court, 1954)
Mesarosh v. United States
352 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1956)
Shelton v. Tucker
364 U.S. 479 (Supreme Court, 1960)
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
376 U.S. 254 (Supreme Court, 1964)
Rosenblatt v. Baer
383 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1966)
United States v. O'Brien
391 U.S. 367 (Supreme Court, 1968)
Palmer v. City of Euclid
402 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 1971)
Police Dept. of Chicago v. Mosley
408 U.S. 92 (Supreme Court, 1972)
Buckley v. Valeo
424 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1976)
First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Bellotti
435 U.S. 765 (Supreme Court, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mt. Automobile Association v. Greel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mt-automobile-association-v-greel-mont-1981.