With just days until Election Day, the truism “all politics is local” feels especially relevant this year. Some of voters’ most consequential choices will be the bubbles they fill in for statewide ballot measures and local races. These contests will have a direct effect on their communities — like in Montana, where a highly consequential race has been flying somewhat under the radar.

On Nov. 3, voters there will choose a justice for their state Supreme Court. Two district judges are running: Amy Eddy and Dan Wilson. While the race is officially nonpartisan, Eddy is generally viewed as liberal-leaning, backed by labor unions and conservation groups. Wilson is generally viewed as conservative-leaning, backed by the Montana Republican Party.

The Associated Press says the fight over this court “ranks among the most intense” of the nearly two dozen states also electing justices this fall. Millions of dollars are being spent to win this one seat. Montanans are trying to fight dark money in politics once again.

Montana’s Supreme Court currently leans liberal, 4-3, but if Wilson wins, that majority flips. In just the past several years, Montana’s Supreme Court has issued major rulings protecting legislation around climate, reproductive rights and democracy.

On climate, the court ruled 6-1 in 2023 in favor of 16 young people who sued the state, arguing that its promotion of fossil fuels violated their right to a clean and healthful environment under the Montana Constitution. It was the first ruling of its kind in the country.

On abortion, Montana’s Supreme Court responded to the Dobbs decision by turning to its own state constitution to expand abortion access That’s the power of state courts: They can protect certain rights even when the federal courts no longer guarantee them.

On voting, in 2024 a 4-3 ruling from the court struck down four voter suppression laws including one that would have ended Election Day registration. The court held that those laws impermissibly interfered with the right to vote. It noted, “The record shows that more than 70,000 Montanans have utilized election day registration to vote since 2005 and that many electors would be disenfranchised without the availability of election day registration.”Republicans in the state didn’t love those decisions, which is probably why there’s so much attention and money going into this race.

To be clear, the money flows from both sides. According to the Brennan Center two political action committees — Montanans for Freedom and Responsibility and Justice Watch — have spent a combined $1.8 million on ads against Wilson. And the PAC More Jobs, Less Government has spent about $460,000 on television ads against Eddy.

According to the Google Ads Transparency Center another PAC targeting Eddy is the First Principles PAC, which is linked to none other than Leonard Leo.

At least one anti-Eddy ad funded by First Principles PAC can be found on YouTube.

‘Captured court’: Hayes on Leonard Leo’s two-fold plan to form this Supreme Court May 5, 2023 Leo, a right-wing money man and longtime Federalist Society chairman, is the same man who helped handpick the conservative supermajority on the U.S. Supreme Court. Leo’s network has been involved in state court races across the country.

Now, you may be asking: Why is this particular state race so important to Leo, who doesn’t live anywhere near Montana?

Just consider those decisions noted above. Montana is the fifth-largest coal-producing state in the country, and its court handed down the nation’s first constitutional climate ruling. On abortion, Montana’s state constitution continues to protect access after Dobbs. Meanwhile, Leo’s network has poured millions into anti-abortion groups pushing for bans all over the country.

If this story feels like déjà vu, it’s because we’ve seen a version of it. In Wisconsin last year, more than $100 million from both sides of the aisle was spent on a single state Supreme Court seat, a national record.

Elon Musk spent at least $20 million on the candidate backed by Republicans. He tried to promise $1 million checks to those who voted. The liberal candidate won anyway, by about 10 points.

But here’s some fun history: Montana has, in fact, lived through this before. In the early 1900s, wealthy industrialists known as the Copper Kings bought legislators, judges and even a U.S. Senate seat.

In 1912, Montana voters fought back through a ballot initiative, banning corporate spending in elections outright. That law stood for a century until 2012, when the U.S. Supreme Court struck it down citing Citizens United Now Montanans are trying to fight dark money in politics once again. On the ballot this year is a measure that would bar corporations, unions and dark money nonprofits from spending on elections in the state, which President Donald Trump won by almost 20 points.

The Montana Chamber of Commerce sued to keep the measure off the ballot and lost. The state Republican Party, of course, opposes it. But former Republican Gov. Marc Racicot supports it, calling the measure a “brilliant idea.”He added, “If we get this done, it’s going to spill over and be an example for every other state in the nation.”Here’s where we come full circle. The ballot measure would target exactly the kind of money that funds most PACs: anonymous dollars routed through nonprofits.

And if the measure passes, expect a legal fight, one that could land before the Montana Supreme Court — the very court Leo’s PAC is spending money to flip.

This November, Montana voters will answer two consequential questions on a single ballot: who sits on their highest court and whether corporations get to keep spending money to influence their elections.

That’s why you should never overlook these downballot races. The billionaires writing those checks in back rooms aren’t just trying to shape outcomes in Washington, D.C., they’re working to extend their influence all the way down to your state government and local communities. The post The high-stakes Montana court race flying under the radar MS NOW