DOCSLIB.ORG

SENATE JUDICIARY Combiittee AUG 1 0 Lcfl2 February 8, 1979 of MO&Tkna the Thirtieth Meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee Was Called to Order by Senator Everett R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SENATE JUDICIARY Combiittee AUG 1 0 Lcfl2 February 8, 1979 of MO&Tkna the Thirtieth Meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee Was Called to Order by Senator Everett R MINUTES OF MEETING SENATE JUDICIARY COMbIITTEE AUG 1 0 lcfl2 February 8, 1979 OF MO&TkNA The thirtieth meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee was called to order by Senator Everett R. Lensink, Chairman, in room 405 of the capitol building at 9:39 a.m. on the above date. ROLL CALL: All members were present. CONSIDERATION OF SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 12: This is a joint resolution of the Senate and the House of Representatives clarifying the intentions of the 43rd legisla- ture concerning the time limit placed upon the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Senator Lensink stated that he recognized the extreme im- portance to everyone concerning this bill and the marked dif- ference of opinion. He asked everyone to respect the viewpoints of each side. He stated that he would give twenty minutes to the proponents and twenty minutes to the opponents. Senator Galt, sponsor of the bill, gave the committee a packet of testimony and offered a statement. He introduced Betty Babcock. Mrs. Betty Lee Babcock, Helena, Montana, gave a statement in support of this resolution. (See ~xhibitA,) Mrs. Cheryl Cozzens from Billings, Montana, gave a prepared statement in support of this resolution. (See Exhibit B.) Mrs. Kenneth D. Peterson, attorney in private practice in Billings, gave a statement in support of this resolution. Miss Angela Romaine gave a statement in support. Mrs. Marilyn Wessil, from Bozeman, introduced Jean Ellison, from Stevensville, who gave a statement in opposition to this resolution. Mrs. Earl Rose11 from Billings, gave a statement in oppo- sition to this resolution. Mrs. Barbara Schelling, McCloud, Montana, representing women in rural Montana, gave a statement opposing this legisla- tion. Maggie Davis, representing the League of Women Voters, gave a statement in opposition. Minutes - February 8, 1979 Senate Judiciary Committee Page Two - .Fran EPge, Billings, Montana, and representing the ERA Coun- ' cil with 1200 individual members, said that they strongly oppose this resolution, Flora Martin, a professional home econominist and represen- ting Montana Association sf Home Economists, gave a statement in opposition. Jim Murray, Executive Secretary of Montana AFL-CIO, gave a statement opposing this bill. Sister Kathryn Rutan, representing the National Assembly of Women Religious and Network, which encompasses 5,000 Catholic sisters in the United States, stated they have been supporting .the ERA movement since 1973. Phil Campbell, representing the Montana Educators Associa- tion, stated that they have supported the ratification of ERA since 1973- Gary Jepsen, pastor ~f the St. John's Lutheran Church, stated that in 1972, at their national conference, they passed a resolution supporting ratification of ERA and were opposed to the resolution. Mary Munger, R.N,, representing the Montana Nurses Associa- tion, and also a chairperson at the International Women's Year conference, stated that 1200 members in 1973 voted to support ratification of ERA. Mrs. Irene Sshnell, Butte, representing the National Fede- ration of Business and Professional Wamen stated that it took two hundred years for women to become citizens under the consti- tution and that they opposed this resolution. Senator GaPt made a closing statement and he stated that you can vote for this resolution and still be a backer of the ERW movement. Senator Lensink said that he appreciated the excellent testi- mony and the excellent manner in which it was presented to the committee and that the committee will act on this bill soon. (See numerous amounts of written testimony presented.) CONSIDERATION OF SENATE BILL 288: Senator Brown gave an ex~fanationof this bill, which is an ( act to provide additional authority for converting shares of a corporation on merger. There were no further proponents and no opponents. Minutes - Februaryc 8, 1979 Senate Judiciary Committee Page Three Senator Towe moved that the bill do pass. Motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF SENATE BILL 293: Senator Towe gave an explanation of this bill, which is an act to revise youth court act to allow restitution. The sponsor . of this bill is Senator Thomas, but he was not able to attend. Becky Giles gave a statement in support of this bill and explained how a youth who had been paroled from Pine Hills wrecked five cars and how they suffered much loss from this youth's action. Jerry Metzyer, coordinator for the youth court in Great Falls, stated he was the co-author of this bill and gave testi- mony in support of this bill. Senator Thomas arrived at the hearing and gave a further explanation of this bill. There were no further pro~onentsor opponents. Senator Van Valkenburg questioned why there was a limita- tion of $1,500.00 and felt that if the kid had a $1,500.00 hot rod. why should he not lose his hot rod. Senator Turnage said that he did not feel that the guar- dians should be liable and he stated that there are some youths who would just love to stick mom and dad just to get even. There was further discussion on problems in the bill. Senator Towe moved that the bill be amended on page 9, line 14 by inserting "."and strike the remainder of new mate- rial following the word "youth". The motion carried unanimously. Senator Tove moved that this bill do pass, as amended. The motion carried unanimously. RECONSIDERATION OF SENATE BILL 288: Ward Shanahan, representing the Business Section of the State Bar of Montana, offered some amendments to this bill. Sen- ator Towe moved that we reconsider action taken previously on this bill. Senator Towe moved the adoption of the amendments. The mo- tion carried unanimously. Senator Towe moved that the bill do pass as amended. The motion carried unanimously. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:04 a.m. SENATOR EVERETT R. T,ENSTNK pun Tnxt-~~ ROLL CALL I<act~Day Attach to Minutes. r' SENATE --i SENATE )dG-y>t -rnmT& BILL ' ; VISITORS ' GISTER DATE -;/:Af - I Please note bill no. NAME REPRESENTING BILL # SUPPORT(check one) I - , I I .' . ,'. 7. ZW/' I - . , ! /i /' T -- -, I , 1 I I ' . > ; i I 1 - I --- --.--._ - ---t_PLEASE r PREPAR~~STATEMENT WITH SECRETARY SENATE \&(C L i P.- 1'7 COMMITTEE BILL~JR/L- VISITORS' REGISTER DATE --f'I SEWiTE 3~lF~11C>c:c:~7, COMMITTEE / BILL b Please note bill no. -Fheck-- NAME REPRESENTING BILL # SUPPORT^ OPPC ,A I) - , , ,,' >+L t /() ' A/. j,,q.n, ,4 iei- c' - .7 I 7 1~ / .? 1.' , , 'J ,I ,b,- 1- .!\L 4 b).,.4 1 I-) / .. , , a , J , / I! . -- ... _-.- l_ri;vsil1L / J I I ! I, ; , \, 1;, l - --- --- r !I is4 293 1' +' I --+----.. .-- - - -.--- It SJQ 11-- :' tj I./ ! iI. : I I I I I ! j I1 , ! i I (--I' iI j' I 1 1 -- -- i I 1: I ! j: ----t-- - - 1 r t i 1 I 1: 1 I! i 1 2['I1 Q I I - 1' - I '1 - - j I +-T - I I I I I - -- -- -- PLEASE LEAVE PREPARED STATEMENT WITH SECRETARY C ,/ , F ..1ddT8c- t -. ,$ . [d- (2-.L&>C * -[ -""CL C --.-/- 2-L /J: <-,: SENATE > COHflITTLE BILL~UT12 ~ISITORS REGISTER DATE 2,,4-/J- NAME REPRESENTING BILL # SUPPORT OPPf - U ( */ I 8, I , . I --"- I i ,', - --..- ? ' /fiF7 J h/4.& ! dSCdy'' Cr ' 1,. -9 , --. I' , / /? /'1 ..-- Q. ' ( 9 [! // %14$ / v~kLu.I 1f l/\~p'/--?I v CC~~L-L I ;, ;, !,q./<.L;< ,:, i <. ,- I I . L // ' -, -LAC La- ,.'J,,.c/L~-c; - ,, : h,.:,l . ,/Lab' ) i. "I,. (,j 1 f', SENATE bl ,Y[J<(~ ha, COMMITTEE 3 / BILL VISITORS' REGISTER DATE ->-g->? b Please note bill no. check ox-' NAME REPRESENTING SENATE ))f(d(r.d 4)2 q COMMITTEE L' L' /' BILL y.1 1\7/~ VISITORS ' REGISTER NAME REPRESENTING ! I 1 1 I' 1 1 I - I -- I 'i!. -- I i 1 I 1- - --- -- -- PLEASE LEAVE PREPARED STATEMENT WITH SECRETARY 1 27 .' 4Ldc,-• J SENATE &,>idy COMMITTEE nrm 5 J R 12 v1sIToRst REGISTER DATE )->.->+ .I-&.-* / ,' ,/..-,- -~,L>A.--.- -A 4-~./-(&>4~ .. /QL&&+,- (- f-* /' SENATE $lc{.(( :-<-I> yy COMMITTEE BILL S 12- VISITORS' REGISTER p;II 40 '04 psci1?c1 j, REPRESENTING ' * SENATE DATE SENATE BILL DATE Please note bill no. - (check one) NAME REPRESENTING BILL # SUPPORT OPPG e<x-.;* ,, . ,J,, . /' a'$ . ,/' , . i 1 . 17. :J -:. ~-y.l.J;c;-,. j ~LC~Jji . ? cl.zd' :. ;2 - '(7 , f 7 L' T t . 1 , i, ff ( , J . ..:-,; ,'J 1, / ;'/ Y J;(, , / --.. LC; f p :i / / / diGri1 -!tb4 8.0 2,3.,,,,J ' );!i; A}, @ I ., , C' , 'J I .'-.',, , 7. , y !... * .,-. %.,, ' L - i -,/ ~33-r/ / / .) - 4 .-- ' I i A.L r i 1 I ! 2 6 I ; I.i I 1 1- i : I rI j L ' . 1 - -+-! , I I 1 I i -- -- ---- . I PLEASE LEAVE PREPARED STATc~phrr r.lrnll ct-*t-,c*Fnxr SENATE BILL s~f /A VISITORS ' GISTER DATE 2- -8d a Please note bill no. (check one,4- NAME REPRESENTING BILL # SUPPORT OPP: pP 13 I 3.. SJR 12 is a reaffirmation of the states rights in the amendment process. 2. The states have the right to put any wording in their ' resolutions of ratification. 3. Montana put a time limit in HJR 4 which was ratified accordingly. Montana held up her end of the constitutional amendment process. 4. Congress should respect our right and our ratification document which includes a specific time limit. 5, Congress, however, did not abide by their end of the process because the extension changes the way our ratification was written. Montana did include a time limit in HJR 4. 6. I, along with others, do not like the (fedp interfering w with states' rights. Congress is manipulating the constitution, which includes our state rights. 7, SJR 12 opposes this # manipulation, that being the extension.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Legislative Council Report on the Montana Constitution
    HKI'ORT \l MBER 6 STATE DOCUMENTS Montana Constitutional Convention Occasional Papers ^XtLTlQv^ Legislative Council Report on the Montana /97,.,9lX Constitution PreparedBy: Montana Constitutional Convention Com,tnis8ion MONTANA STATE LIBRARY S342 0cpa6C72Lc.1 Report on the Montana constitution. 3 0864 00006642 6 •MONTANA CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION 1971-1972 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REPORT ON THE MONTANA CONSTITUTION CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OCCASIONAL PAPER NO. 6 PREPARED BY MONTANA CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION COMMISSION 1 MONTANA CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION COMMISSION COMMISSION MEMBERS Chairman Vice-chairman ALEXANDER BLEWETT EUGENE H. MAHONEY Great Falls Thompson Falls CHARLES A. BOVEY JACK E. BRENNER Great Falls Grant MRS. FIRMAN H. BROWN ARTHUR C. HAGENSTON Missoula Gl endive CHARLES L. HARRINGTON CLYDE L. HAWKS But te St. Xavier C. EUGENE PHILLIPS CLYDE A. RADER Kalispe 1 Hardin R. H. "TY" ROBINSON LEONARD A. SCHULZ Missoula Di I Ion WILLIAM G. STERNHAGEN RANDALL SWANBERG Helena Great Falls BRUCE R. TOOLE DR. ELLIS WALDRON Bi llings Missoula COMMISSION STAFF DALE A. HARRIS JERRY R. HOLLORON Executive Director Assistant Director ROGER A. BARBER SANDRA R. MUCKELSTON Counsel Counsel P. RICK APPLEGATE KAREN D. BECK Research Analyst Research Analyst RICHARD F. BECHTEL NANCY M. MALEE Research Analyst Research Analyst BARTLEY 0. CARSON KAREN C. NYBERG Executive Secretary Secretary juAnita fontana GINNY WATERMAN Secretary Secretary PREFACE The delegates to the 1971-1972 Montana Constitutional Convention will need historical, legal and comparative information about the Montana Constitution. Recognizing this need, the 1971 Legislative Assembly created the Constitutional Convention Commission and directed it to assemble and prepare essential information for the Convention. To fulfill this responsibility, the Constitutional Convention Commission is preparing a series of research reports under the general title of Constitutional Convention Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution of the State of Wash­ Ington*
    ~b£ as ington istorical ~uart£rlp :J§oarb of <lEbitorl) CLARENCE B. BAGLEY. Seattle. W. D. LYMAN, Walla Walla. J. N. BOWMAN. Seattle. EDWARD McMAHON. Seattle. T. C. ELLIOTT. Walla Walla. THOMAS W. PROSCH. Seattle. FRANK A. GOLDER, Pullman. OLIVER H. RICHARDSON. Seattle. CEYLON S. KINGSTON, Cheney. O. B. SPERLIN. Tacoma. E. O. S. SCHOLEFIELD. Victoria. B. C. ALLEN WEIR. Olympia. ;§Managing CEbitor EDMOND S. MEANY :J§ul)incl)l) $Manager CHARLES W. SMITH VOL. IV. NO.4 OCTOBER, 1913 ISSUED QUARTERLY ClContents I.EIHIEI" J. 1,:\.\1'1' 0 ..11';" "f th., C"llstltutl"u "f th~ ~.nt.~ Ht' \'-ltshjJl~tnll .. .. .. -_.':J"'­ JHH' H. l\.1':\E.-\H .... , ..... :\oh"s on tht>' COllstitutional Con"eu- tit.11 ., .. .. .. .. ., .. .. ., ....o>-~ 'I'HEO))OHI-: L. "'fILE" 'I'h,· ("o".tit"tl"" "f tilt. Stat.. Dnd It. Ea'tOt·hl! 1"'1011 Puhlh~ Inter(·id~ ., 281 n4H·l·:l1E::\'I\~-('orr(·sl.nllc1t·nt·t~.:\hullt Indian Lands " .. ~~~ 1I00K HEYI E\\'" , .. .. ,, .. .. ' .. ., .. .. .. 2\10 'E\Y!'i nEP;\Il'l""'~"I' '" , " ::Hti :\OWI'HWI';"'I'EIl:\ HI"'I'tlll\ '" 1.1..\III·~ .. " '. ::!lS BEPH"'l' llEP.\H'r"E."I'-(;t"urJ,:;"t" '\~ilk('·N: Histnr~' of Oret;oJl, Gt"o- ",· ..al.Io\"ul, Geolo,;it'Rl aud Political (Xew York, Col)· lS4i> I aoo 1:\IlEX. "01.1\11-: I\', ' ., .' :11:1 THE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY UNIVERSITY STATION SEATTLE. WASHINGTON .•. ~ '. -:{'"'' It'ntered at the Postofflce at Sea tlIe as second-class mail matter. • ~bt Wa~bington Wnibtrsitp ~tatt J)i~torical ~ocittp @fficl'rs anb rsoarb of ~ru!)tl'l's: CLARENCE B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Montana Constitution: a National Perspective, 64 Mont
    Montana Law Review Volume 64 Article 2 Issue 1 Winter 2003 1-2003 The onM tana Constitution: A National Perspective G. Alan Tarr Distinguished Professor of Political Science, Rutgers University-Camden Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation G. Alan Tarr, The Montana Constitution: A National Perspective, 64 Mont. L. Rev. (2003). Available at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr/vol64/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Montana Law Review by an authorized editor of The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. Tarr: The Montana Constitution: A National Perspective ARTICLE THE MONTANA CONSTITUTION: A NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE* G. Alan Tarr** The creation of a political society's fundamental law is a defining moment in the history of that society. This is true whether one is speaking of the creation of a national constitution such as the United States Constitution or a subnational constitution such as the Montana Constitution.' James Dealy, a prominent historian of the early twentieth century, once wrote, "one might almost say that the romance, the poetry, and even the drama of American politics are deeply embedded in state constitutions."2 This article may not provide * This article relies in part upon my Big Doings in Big Sky: Montana's Constitution in Context, 1 RENDEZVOUS 6 (1997). I wish to thank the Montana Committee for the Humanities for permission to draw upon that earlier study. ** Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Director, Center for State Constitutional Studies, Rutgers University-Camden.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Constitutional and Statutory Provisions Specifically Applicable to the Legislature
    MONTANA CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS SPECIFICALLY APPLICABLE TO THE LEGISLATURE Montana Constitution *Note that there are other provisions of the Montana Constitution that place limitations on the authority of the Legislature (i.e., fundamental right provisions, separation of powers, etc.). Article 5. The Legislature Section 1. Power and structure. The legislative power is vested in a LEGISLATURE consisting of a senate and a house of representatives. The people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and referendum. Section 2. Size. The size of the LEGISLATURE shall be provided by law, but the senate shall not have more than 50 or fewer than 40 members and the house shall not have more than 100 or fewer than 80 members. Section 3. Election and terms. A member of the house of representatives shall be elected for a term of two years and a member of the senate for a term of four years each to begin on a date provided by law. One-half of the senators shall be elected every two years. Section 4. Qualifications. A candidate for the LEGISLATURE shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county. Section 5. Compensation. Each member of the LEGISLATURE shall receive compensation for his services and allowances provided by law. No LEGISLATURE may fix its own compensation.
    [Show full text]
  • Treasury Notes - Constitutional Law - Indebtedness­ Creation Of
    2 OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Treasury Notes - Constitutional Law - Indebtedness­ Creation of. A law providing for borrowing two million dollars on treasury notes of the State for the purpose of paying out­ standing and accruing claims against the General Fund, and for the retirement of such treasury notes with moneys from the collection of taxes already levied within two years of the issuance of the treasury notes, is valid and effective without submission to a vote of the people, under the constitutional requirement that "no debt or liability shall be created which shall singly, or in the aggregate with any existing debt or liability, exceed the sum of $100,000.00," unless the law authorizing the same shall have been submitted to a vote of the people. To the Senate Judiciary Committee, Helena, Montana. Gentlemen: You have requested my opinion as to the constitutionality of the legislation proposed in Senate Bill 283, which authorizes the State of Montana to borrow two million dollars on treasury notes for the purpose of paying outstanding and accruing claims against the General Fund of the State, and to take up the treasury notes with interest, with moneys from the collection of taxes levied for general State purposes for the years 1921 and 1922. Section 2 of Article XIII of the Constitution of Montana provides as follows: "The legislative assembly shall not in any manner create any debt except by law which shall be irrepealable until the in­ debtedness therein provided for shall have been fully paid or discharged; such law shall
    [Show full text]
  • Access?Access?Acci Ccess?Access?Access?Ac S7access7access7access7acces Ss7access7access'*
    BLM LIBRARY CCE >CCE S7ACCESS7I :CESS?ACCESS'A kCCESS?AC S?ACCESS'ACCt ess7access7access7a ;cess?access?access?acci ccess?access?access?ac s7access7access7access7acces ss7access7access'* ;cess?access?access?acc ! ^ccess?access?access7access7i s?access?access?a ess7access7access2 :cess?access'>accj ccess7access7aj S ,'ACCESS?ACCESjf ESS?ACCESS?ACCj £CESS?ACCESS'>Af kCCESS?ACCESS?| s7access7acces ess7access7acc1 cess7access7ac access7access7a s?access?access?' ess?access?access' cess?access?access?aC vccess7access7access7access7access7access7accej s?access?access?access?access?access'access ->ac( ess7access7access7access7access7access7access, ;cess?access?access'>ac, 4ccess7access7acce s7access7acces' ^b ess?access7acce^ cess?access?a(; *ccess?access? s?access?acc£$ ess?access?acc cess?access?a| &ccess7access? s?access?accesi ess7access7acce cess7access7acc access7access7acci s?access?access?accr™^^^^^ """""^^""^ ess?access?access?access?access?access?access?access'; acc ;cess'access?access?access?access?access?access?access?a *ccess?access?access?access?access?access?access?access? s?access?access ess?access?acc| cess7access7a0 &ccess7access7/j s7access7accesi ess7access7acc1 CESS?ACCESS?Aq ACCESS7ACCESS? S7ACCESS7ACCESI ESS7ACCESS7ACCI H|cCESS?ACCESS?Aq CCESS?ACCESS?>) S7ACCESS7ACCESS ESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS'ACC CCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?A ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS'>ACCESS'ACCESS'> ,S?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCESS?ACCE^»^^|£S- ESS?ACCESS?ACCE ..^fl ^^. ;CESS?ACCESS?ACCj
    [Show full text]
  • Under the Montana Constitution: Parental Rights As the Starting Point Mary Helen Mcneal Professor of Law, University of Montana School of Law
    Montana Law Review Volume 66 Article 5 Issue 1 Winter 2005 1-2005 Toward a "Civil Gideon" under the Montana Constitution: Parental Rights as the Starting Point Mary Helen McNeal Professor of Law, University of Montana School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Mary Helen McNeal, Toward a "Civil Gideon" under the Montana Constitution: Parental Rights as the Starting Point, 66 Mont. L. Rev. (2005). Available at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr/vol66/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Montana Law Review by an authorized editor of The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. McNeal: Toward a "Civil Gideon" Under the Montana Constitution TOWARD A "CIVIL GIDEON" UNDER THE MONTANA CONSTITUTION: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS THE STARTING POINT Mary Helen McNeal* To the extent justice depends on charity . it is destined to be unequal.1 I. INTRODUCTION Litigants appear regularly in Montana courts without the assistance of counsel. In disputes ranging from abuse and neglect to landlord-tenant, consumer, public benefits, social security, insurance, dissolution, child support and parenting issues arising in administrative proceedings, Montana's courts of limited jurisdiction, the district courts, and the Montana Supreme Court, many litigants do not have access to attorney assistance. 2 Some elect not to be represented, but many low or moderate income individuals cannot secure free legal assistance and cannot afford to hire lawyers. Few would disagree that many of these litigants would benefit from counsel.
    [Show full text]
  • State Constitutions and Statutes
    2 State Constitutions and Statutes DESPITE THE SENATE DEFEAT in 1876 of the Blaine Amend­ ment, the movement for prohibiting sectarian instruction in the public schools and forbidding state support of pa­ rochial schools was too powerful to be ignored. During the period just prior to and following the Civil War, most states were including in their constitutions prohibitions concerning the use of tax revenue for sectarian purposes in both public and parochial schools. In 1876, the Con­ gress of the United States passed a law requiring all states admitted to the Union after that date to have irrevocable provisions in their constitutions that guaranteed religious freedom and the establishment of a public school system free from sectarian control.1 It would appear, however, that the United States Su­ preme Court's ruling in Coyle v. Smith would make such a provision unenforceable by Congress once the state has has been officially admitted.2 There, the court held that states, after being admitted to the Union, were on a basis of equality with all other states, and that restrictions placed 37 38 THE BIBLE, RELIGION, AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS upon them by Congress as conditions for admission, could not include matters normally considered to be completely under a state's jurisdiction. Even before the 1876 federal requirement, states en­ tering the Union around the middle of the nineteenth cen­ tury had anticipated the need for such provisions and in­ cluded them in their constitutions. Wisconsin, which be­ came a state in 1848, has provisions covering these sub­ jects which are fairly representative of this voluntary tend­ ency: The right of every man to worship almighty God accord­ ing to the dictates of his own conscience shall never be infringed; nor shall any man be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship .
    [Show full text]
  • Montana State Agencies and Documents 1864-1970
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1970 Montana state agencies and documents 1864-1970 John R. Coleman The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Coleman, John R., "Montana state agencies and documents 1864-1970" (1970). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 8796. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/8796 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MONTANA STATE AGENCIES AND DOCUMENTS, 1864 - 1470 by John R. Coleman B.A., Unive-t.ity of Montana, I965 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, University of Montana 1970 Approved by; Chairman, Board of Examiners an. Graduate School Date Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: EP39597 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT Dissertation FHiblishing UMI EP39597 Published by ProQuest LLC (2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Home Rule in Montanaâ•Flpresent and Proposed
    Montana Law Review Volume 19 Article 1 Issue 2 Spring 1958 January 1958 Home Rule in Montana—Present and Proposed David R. Mason Montana State University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation David R. Mason, Home Rule in Montana—Present and Proposed, 19 Mont. L. Rev. 79 (1957). Available at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr/vol19/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Montana Law Review by an authorized editor of The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. Mason: Home Rule in Montana Home Rule In Montana-Present and Proposed By DAVID R. MASON* One who turns the pages of the Montana cases concerned with munici- pal corporations and their powers will witness what appears to be a basic, although often unarticulated, conflict as to the position of cities and towns in the Montana polity. The extent to which the inhabitants of a local com- munity may control their own affairs free from legislative interference has always been a matter of some dispute. There is a theory of an inherent right to local self-government, which distinguishes "governmental" func- tions of a municipal corporation as an agent of the state from functions primarily or principally in the interests of the people living within the limits of the municipality. Under this theory a municipal corporation en- joys an absolute right of self-government in those matters which are of mu- nicipal
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. _________ ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- TIMOTHY C. FOX, in his official capacity as the Attorney General for the State of Montana; JONATHAN MOTL, in his official capacity as the Commissioner of Political Practices for the State of Montana, Petitioners, v. SANDERS COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit --------------------------------- --------------------------------- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI --------------------------------- --------------------------------- TIMOTHY C. FOX MARK W. MATTIOLI Attorney General Chief Deputy of Montana Attorney General MICHAEL G. BLACK* Assistant Attorney General *Counsel of Record MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE P.O. Box 201401 Helena, MT 59620-1401 [email protected] [email protected] (406) 444-2026 ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i QUESTION PRESENTED The question presented is: Whether, in the exercise of its Tenth Amendment and Article IV, Section 4 authority, Montana’s deci- sion to prohibit political party endorsements and expenditures in nonpartisan judicial elections is a facially unconstitutional abridgement of the First Amendment, or whether, in accordance with Renne v. Geary, the
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Montana's Constitutional Convention, Individual Rights Protections, and State Constitutionalism
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1-1-2011 "Each Generation of a Free Society": The Relationship between Montana's Constitutional Convention, Individual Rights Protections, and State Constitutionalism Inga Katrin Nelson Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Nelson, Inga Katrin, ""Each Generation of a Free Society": The Relationship between Montana's Constitutional Convention, Individual Rights Protections, and State Constitutionalism" (2011). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 311. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.311 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. “Each Generation of a Free Society”: The Relationship between Montana’s Constitutional Convention, Individual Rights Protections, and State Constitutionalism by Inga Katrin Nelson A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History Thesis Committee: Tim Garrison, Chair David Johnson William Lang Christopher Shortell Portland State University ©2011 Abstract In the mid-1970s, state courts began to interpret state constitutions independently of the federal constitution in a way that provided greater protection for individual rights at the state versus federal level. Scholars have generally attributed the rise of this movement, known as state constitutionalism, to the actions and scholarship of judges and point to the cause as a fear that the Burger court would rollback Warren court era protections for individual rights.
    [Show full text]