One thing that struck us here at CCP is the rationale that the Montana Attorney General adopted, and the Montana Supreme Court accepted, in its decision in Western Tradition Partnership v. Attorney General, the decision which held that the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC doesn’t apply in Montana. The Attorney General’s argument, accepted by the Court, is that Montana is a uniquely corrupt state.
Now, if you were a Montana official, or legislator, what would you think of that argument? Indeed, if you were a Montana voter, what would you think when your Attorney General argues that the people you would elect to office, without state guidance, would be particularly corrupt? In other words, the Court’s opinion basically says, “Hey, you U.S. Supreme Court justices! You don’t realize what a bunch of rubes we have out here in Montana. This state’s voters are uniquely prone to elect corrupt politicians. We do whatever big business tells us. So Citizens United may be fine for the other 49 states, but we here in Montana are just not quite the same quality as the rest.”
