A discussion about whether Montana’s Constitution should be changed drew protests Tuesday night outside a hotel in Montana’s capital.
Dozens of opponents of changing the Constitution blew whistles and banged on pots along North California Street outside the Delta Hotel. Inside, Montana’s governor and other conservatives listened to a presentation by the Coeur d’Alene-based Mountain States Policy Center about the Constitution’s alleged need of a rewrite.
The existing state Constitution, enacted in 1972 and widely considered progressive in content, gives voters the chance to approve a new constitutional convention every 20 years — an opportunity Montana voters have twice rejected, in 1990 and 2010. The next vote on Montana’s blueprint for state government is in 2030. The prospect of a new constitutional convention, at which delegates could propose revisions and rewrites, comes as Montana’s Republican legislators grow increasingly frustrated with state courts rejecting conservative laws on constitutional grounds.
“All of this has aggravated division rather than yield,” speaker Rob Natelson told his audience of roughly 100. “Of course, by and large, many in the media and some of Montana’s old guard have protected the court and the court’s distorted view of the Constitution. But numerous problems persist, and they simply cannot be papered over that way.”
Natelson, a former University of Montana law professor and Montana gubernatorial candidate, spoke as the policy center’s senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence. Natelson is a contributor on constitutional matters for several conservative think tanks. Before the event, he strolled along the protest line on North California Street. Few seemed to realize the jaunty man in khakis and a sport coat was the trigger of their objections.
“There’s a meeting in there, regarding changing the Montana Constitution to suit those who want to destroy our state, in my opinion,” said protester Joanne Gores, gesturing toward the hotel’s front door.
Bundled up against the February chill, Gores wore a giant yellow bird head crafted from cardboard. The cacophony of drums and whistles around her made her difficult to hear.
“I grew up in Montana. I remember when the Clark Fork ran orange. I remember when a lot of the kids in Anaconda had arsenic in their blood … I’ve seen it, and we don’t want to go back,” Gores said.
Specifically, Gores expressed concern about the future of Montanans’ right to a “clean and healthful environment,” a signature provision of the state Constitution. The state Supreme Court in 2024 ruled that the right includes the right to a “stable climate system,” meaning the state has to consider greenhouse gas emissions when reviewing industrial projects for permitting. Gov. Gianforte has said that decision will lead to “open season on Montana’s all-of-the-above approach” to power plants, coal mining and energy development.
Inside the Delta, where more than 140 people had made reservations for the free-admission night of conservative agenda discussion and crusted chicken parmesan, Natelson called for constitutional revision.
The state Constitution isn’t the sacred document some have suggested, Natelson said. Drafted in the first three months of 1972 and put on the ballot that June, the Constitution barely passed muster with voters. The Montana Farm Bureau organized and supported a lawsuit against the document’s ratification, alleging procedural problems and claiming the margin of support for ratification wasn’t adequate.
The state Supreme Court ruled against the Farm Bureau-backed challenge in a 3-2 split decision.
Voters support for leaving the Constitution as it is was 82% in 1990, and dipped to just over 58% in 2010, according to state election data.
The sections of the Constitution that have disqualified several state laws passed with Republican support since 2021 mostly concern voting rights, environmental protections, and privacy rights regarding medical decisions, specifically reproductive health and gender transition. The state Constitution also grants the state university system the right to govern itself, including the regulation of guns on campus, which legislators have attempted to override.
LATEST STORIES
Poll week: How Montanans feel about sales tax, immigration and state officials
We polled Montana voters on an array of issues. Results will roll out the week of March 2.
Where does eastern Montana start? Montanans disagree
Montana is in many ways a land of two halves: a western Montana of snow-capped mountains and national forests joined in political unity with an eastern Montana of wide-open plains and flatland agriculture. It’s a time-honored divide: peaks versus plains, Missoula versus Miles City, Flathead versus Fort Peck lakes. But where exactly is the dividing line?
Montana voters overwhelmingly view cost as a major mental health care hurdle
According to a Montana Free Press-Eagleton Poll, conducted in late 2025 and early 2026, 67% of respondents cited “cost of services” as a major problem when it comes to accessing care. A smaller share, 42%, cited the stigma associated with receiving care as a major problem, while 47% said the same about the travel distance necessary to access services.