In brief
Montana's Supreme Court dismissed a misconduct case against Republican Attorney General Austin Knudsen, despite finding violations of professional conduct. The court ruled that the proceedings against him lacked due process due to the exclusion of his expert witness. Chief Justice Cory Swanson issued a warning to all Montana attorneys to follow lawful court orders amid ongoing political disputes centered around a 2021 law that bolstered the governor's powers. Knudsen expressed relief at the court's decision, labeling the case a political stunt.
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a misconduct case against the state’s attorney general, Austin Knudsen, despite finding that he had previously violated professional conduct rules. The case revolved around Knudsen's actions in defense of a controversial law that granted the governor more power over judicial appointments.
Last year, a court-appointed commission recommended a 90-day suspension of Knudsen's law practice for allegedly attacking the integrity of the justices. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the commission had violated Knudsen's due process by excluding his expert witness.
Knudsen, a Republican, stated that the complaint had been a distraction and characterized the proceedings as politically motivated. He expressed appreciation for the court's decision, which he deemed a resolution to a frivolous complaint. Chief Justice Cory Swanson emphasized that the ruling served as a public admonition, urging all Montana attorneys to adhere to lawful court orders.
While the court's justices acknowledged Knudsen's professional conduct violations, they rejected the recommendation for suspension. The court's ruling was split, with only Justice Katherine Bidegaray dissenting, arguing for a public censure and a short suspension, asserting such actions were necessary for maintaining public trust in the legal system.
The case highlights ongoing tensions between the judiciary and political figures in Montana and reflects a larger GOP initiative to reshape the judiciary in favor of conservative control. The court’s ruling serves both as a reminder of the ethical standards expected of attorneys and the complexities inherent in the balancing of power between state branches.
