State high courts can, through inconsistent reasoning, frequent overrulings, and expansive interpretations of state constitutions, effectively exercise a policy veto that bypasses democratic channels. Montana’s Supreme Court — cited here via its 2022 Board of Regents decision and a long record of outcome‑driven opinions and favoring certain party types — exemplifies how a court can become an oligarchic policy actor at the state level.
— If state judiciaries can block legislatures and amendment processes in practice, that shifts where real policy power resides and raises questions about accountability, judicial selection, and constitutional design.
Robert G. Natelson
2026.05.07
100% relevant
Board of Regents of Higher Education v. Montana (2022) and the author’s claim that the Montana Supreme Court has seized a de facto veto over the state constitutional amendment process.
← Back to All Ideas