WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · LC 905

Legislative bill overview

LC 905 would require Montana courts to adopt statutory interpretations that constrain regulatory agency authority when multiple reasonable interpretations exist. This represents a judicial canon of construction—a rule for how courts should read laws—that tilts toward limiting executive branch power rather than deferring to agency expertise.

Why is this important

Courts currently apply various interpretive frameworks (Chevron deference, plain language doctrine, etc.) that sometimes favor agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. This bill would institutionalize a anti-regulatory bias into Montana's legal system, potentially reducing the effectiveness of environmental, health, and safety regulations that depend on agency implementation. The practical effect would shift power from executive agencies back to the legislature and courts.

Potential points of contention

  • Judicial role vs. legislative intent: Critics argue courts shouldn't predetermine outcomes based on ideology; supporters contend legislators write ambiguous laws and courts shouldn't rubber-stamp agency overreach
  • Regulatory effectiveness: Opponents worry this hampers necessary public health, environmental, and consumer protections that require agency flexibility; proponents argue it prevents "regulatory capture" and bureaucratic expansion
  • Separation of powers: Question whether this appropriately constrains executive power or inappropriately ties judges' hands in interpreting legitimate statutory authority

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.