Judge says voter residency requirement likely violates constitutional rights

A district court judge in Missoula ruled that a new law restricting voters from becoming residents, and therefore voting, in a county they reside in temporarily is likely unconstitutional. 

Judge Jason Marks granted a temporary injunction last month for the Montana Public Interest Research Group against House Bill 413, which was signed into law last year. 

The bill, introduced by Rep. Jane Gillette, R-Three Forks, changed the definition of residency in Montana code, stating that individuals cannot become residents, and therefore vote, in a county if they are there for “temporary work, training, or an educational program.” The bill includes a requirement that voters intend to make a county their permanent home following their temporary purpose in order to vote. 

During hearings in the 2025 session, several members of the Montana State University and University of Montana student body spoke about how the proposed legislation would restrict their ability to vote, simply because they do not know for sure if they plan to stay in their respective counties after graduation.

MontPIRG, which represents nearly 28,000 students across the state, said the law effectively disenfranchises any college students who move to attend school, and sued the state and Secretary of State Christi Jacobsen. MontPIRG argued in court documents that the new law “creates heightened residency requirements for students and certain working Montanans, and that it violates the right to suffrage, equal protection of the laws, and the suffrage rights of young voters specifically.”

Marks wrote in a Feb. 13 order that the state’s arguments against the lawsuit “all but concede that HB 413 is facially unconstitutional if it applies to postsecondary educational programs and students.”

In one example MontPIRG brought its case, University of Montana student Josephine Kleman has lived in Missoula since 2022 and voted during the 2024 election. 

“She considers Missoula her home; it is where she lives, works, pays rent, pays taxes, has almost all her belongings, and where she intends to return when she is away,” court documents state. “However, she cannot say she intends to make Montana her permanent home after graduation, in part because she may apply to AmeriCorps-style programs.”

Under the new law, she is no longer eligible to gain residency in Montana, MontPIRG argued, but her previous state of residency, Kentucky, doesn’t allow her to vote there because she has previously voted in Missoula and resides in the state. 

“This exemplifies a key issue created by HB 413 for students in similar situations: Even if they reside here, have fixed habitation here, and have an intent to return whenever absent, they cannot gain residency or vote here, but their residency here also prevents them from registering to vote elsewhere,” according to court documents. 

“It demonstrates that HB 413 has had a chilling effect on constitutionally protected activities and that it impermissibly interferes with students’ right to vote,” Marks wrote in his order. 

In a simultaneous order on Feb. 13, Marks also denied a motion from the state to enter judgement on the pleadings, again stating that the state “all but concedes” the law is unconstitutional if it applies to college students.