Montana Supreme Court Candidates Met in Bozeman
Associate justice hopefuls Amy Eddy and Dan Wilson appeared at a forum to discuss their judicial philosophies.
Updated on Sept. 24, 2026 in Law
Live Poll
Should judicial candidates accept campaign contributions from political parties or attorneys?
Candidates Amy Eddy and Dan Wilson faced off at a Montana State University forum sponsored by the Gallatin County Bar Association. Both current district judges are vying for the seat of retiring Associate Justice Beth Baker.
Why it matters
The race for the state Supreme Court seat presents voters with distinct approaches to campaign funding and partisan affiliation. The candidates met to clarify their judicial qualifications and perspectives on transparency ahead of the upcoming election.
Amy Eddy and Dan Wilson both serve as district judges in the 11th Judicial District. Eddy led Wilson by a margin of less than 8,000 votes in the June primary election.
The players
Amy Eddy
She is an 11th Judicial District judge currently running for the Montana Supreme Court.
Dan Wilson
He serves as an 11th Judicial District judge and is the opposing candidate for the Supreme Court seat.
Beth Baker
She is an Associate Justice of the Montana Supreme Court who is set to retire at the end of 2026.
Gallatin County Bar Association
This legal organization sponsored the candidate forum held at Montana State University.
The details
Candidates fielded questions from a moderator and audience members regarding the role of the judicial branch and their legal experience. The event highlighted contrasting campaign strategies, with Eddy opting against political party contributions while Wilson has accepted support from the state Republican Party.
Timeline
June 2026: Eddy and Wilson advanced from the primary election.
September 23, 2026: The candidates participated in a forum in Bozeman.
End of 2026: Associate Justice Beth Baker is scheduled to retire from the court.
Political Context
The race highlights a deepening divide over whether judicial candidates should maintain independence from political parties or accept institutional backing. Opposition groups have questioned the influence of partisan funding in judicial elections, raising concerns about impartiality in future rulings.
The winner of this seat will influence legal interpretations and the administration of the judicial branch across the state. Residents should consider the varying approaches to campaign finance and transparency when evaluating which candidate will best serve the state judiciary.
The takeaway
This race demonstrates the increasing tension between non-partisan judicial roles and the influence of party-affiliated campaign funding. Voters are encouraged to review the candidates records as they navigate the selection for this high-court vacancy.
What happens next
Associate Justice Beth Baker will retire from the court at the end of 2026, triggering the transition for the newly elected justice.
Further reading
Learn more about local judicial races and standards on the Law section page.
Source note: This article includes information reported by KPAX News.
Live Poll
Should judicial candidates accept campaign contributions from political parties or attorneys?
