Plaintiffs in 2023 redefining sex lawsuit seek to add on similar 2025 law

Plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the state challenging the constitutionality of a 2023 law passed by the Legislature redefining sex have now filed to challenge a similar 2025 law.

Senate Bill 458 (2023) and Senate Bill 437 (2025) are two similar laws, both sponsored by Sen. Carl Glimm, R-Kila, with the former of those two already stuck down in district court. Late last month, Upper Seven Law, the firm representing plaintiffs in the case, filed a notice to the court requesting to file a supplementary complaint regarding the 2025 law.

The new court filing, dated April 6, says the new legislation is unconstitutional as well.

“Like SB 458, SB 437’s definitions apply to the entire MCA, affecting more than 60 code sections … The bill deprives plaintiffs of the protections and benefits of Montana law and definitively removes all gender-based anti-discrimination protections from the Montana Human Rights Act,” the newly filed court documents say.

It goes on to say the new bill “reimposes” the same definitions as SB 458 and its “intent and effect are the same.”

SB 437 was delayed nearly a year after it was signed by Senate President Matt Regier and sat on House Speaker Brandon Ler’s desk until March, who has said he was holding on to it strategically. It was signed by Gov. Greg Gianforte.

This came after state Attorney General Austin Knudsen tried to ask the Supreme Court for a writ of supervisory control over Missoula District Court, saying they had “run roughshod” over other branches of state government.

Meanwhile, parts of the lawsuit against SB 458 remain, which could allow SB 437 added to, as plaintiffs in the case have requested. Attorneys fees are still being litigated in district court and Upper Seven has said they didn’t hear much from the state about them for months. The court could then decide to rule on the constitutionality of SB 437.

“Senate Bill 437 was duly passed and signed into law by the people’s elected representatives,” a joint March 31 statement from Gianforte and Ler said. “We are proud of our work to defend the values of the Montanans we represent. To no one’s surprise, activists have moved to add this law into ongoing litigation to stop it from going into effect. The Legislature acted deliberately with that possibility in mind. The State of Montana will defend this duly enacted law and ensure it gets a fair hearing in Montana’s judiciary.”

But a plaintiff in the case is about protecting her own freedom.

“This case is about privacy, dignity, and the equal protection of the law,” Plaintiff Susan Edwards said in a press release. “Like my neighbors, I want simply to live my life in peace, keep my fences in good repair, visit with my children and grandchildren, and enjoy the beauty of my rural home. And I will not give up on my fight to protect my privacy and right to pursue liberty.”