The Independent View: Montana GOP Closed Primary Lawsuit Going to Trial

The Montana Republican Party’s lawsuit to force a Closed Primary election to choose its candidates is going to trial, Federal Judge, U.S. District Judge Brian Morris of Great Falls, ruled Monday. He refused to block the 2016 June Primary until the issue is settled.

Morris said “factual questions” remain on whether non-Republicans consistently vote in GOP Primaries in Montana and somehow influence the outcome, against the wishes of actual Republicans. “Those issues must be resolved at trial,”.

Morris rejected requests by both the Party and the State to resolve the case on written arguments.

Matthew Monforton, an attorney representing State GOP County Central Committees, said late Monday he’ll appeal Morris’ ruling denying an injunction to block the June 2016 Primary while the case is resolved.

Monforton said the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could just resolve the case or order the Montana Legislature to establish a new system.

Under Montana’s 100-year-old system, any voter can choose in which Party Primary to vote on Election day in June, and help choose that party’s General Election candidates.

The State Republican Party says its constitutional right of association is being violated by Open Primary elections, because non-Republicans sometimes “cross over” and vote in GOP Primaries and try to influence the outcome in Legislative districts where they know the Republican candidate will win the General Election.

This interference by non-Republicans can end up nominating more moderate GOP candidates that don’t have the support of a majority of Republicans in the Legislative district, the lawsuit says.

The State, which is defending the current system, says there’s no specific evidence that such activity occurs.

Morris said Monday he can’t determine from the evidentiary record so far whether the Open-Primary system truly burdens the GOP’s “associational rights.”

Yet while he said the Party hasn’t provided enough evidence to prove its case, it has raised enough questions to prevent him from ruling in favor of the State without a trial.