Corporate spending initiative ruled unconstitutional

A state judge in Helena recently ruled that a 2012 ballot initiative aimed at reining in campaign contributions by corporations was unconstitutional.

District Court Judge Kathy Seely ruled on a lawsuit against I-166 filed by Geoff Goble, Big Timber, and Marie Rickert, Lewistown, in a Dec. 20 order.

Montana voters approved I-166 by a 2-1 margin. The initiative declares that corporations are not people and money is not political speech, and it directs elected Montana officials to support setting limits on campaign contributions by corporations.

Critics of I-166 attempted to have it removed from the 2012 ballot, but their efforts were blocked by a 5-1 ruling by the Montana Supreme Court.

In her ruling, Seely let stand I-166’s broader declaration that corporations don’t have a constitutional right to free speech, but she also ruled that binding elected officials to vote a certain way on an issue is unconstitutional.

The initiative made it a misdemeanor for elected officials to not support setting limits on corporate contributions by corporations, Seely noted, but that’s unconstitutional.

“The initiative language dictates the action required and the votes to be cast” by elected officials, she said. “In essence, therefore, it predetermines actions and takes from public officials the freedom to vote as they see fit. Those constraints, as well as the criminal liability for violation of the provisions, are not insignificant.”

Backers brought I-166 to Montana voters in reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in the Citizens United case. The high court’s ruling in part declared that some federal restrictions on spending by corporations and unions in elections were unconstitutional. The Citizens United decision effectively nullified a 1912 act passed by Montana voters that limited campaign spending by corporations.