Montana
Marquez v. State of Montana
Amelia Marquez is transgender woman and life-long Montanan. John Doe is a transgender man who was born in Montana, but currently lives out of state. Both wish to correct the sex marker on their birth certificates to reflect who they are. However, a law enacted in 2021, Montana Senate Bill 280, sought to prohibit transgender individuals born in Montana from correcting the sex marker listed on their birth certificate without obtaining a court order indicating that their “sex . . . has been changed by surgical procedure.” The ACLU, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP have sued, claiming that SB 280 violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the Montana State Constitution.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Visit ACLU of Montana
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
All Cases
16 Montana Cases
Montana
Aug 2024
![Van Garderen et al. v. State of Montana](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Van Garderen et al. v. State of Montana
Transgender adolescents, their parents, and two medical providers who work with transgender youth are challenging a 2023 Montana law that bans gender-affirming care for trans youth. The plaintiffs charge the law with violating their rights under the Montana Constitution, including the right to equal protection, the right to access medical care, and the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Van Garderen et al. v. State of Montana](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Montana
LGBTQ Rights
Van Garderen et al. v. State of Montana
Transgender adolescents, their parents, and two medical providers who work with transgender youth are challenging a 2023 Montana law that bans gender-affirming care for trans youth. The plaintiffs charge the law with violating their rights under the Montana Constitution, including the right to equal protection, the right to access medical care, and the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children.
Aug 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
Montana
Aug 2024
![Kalarchik v. Montana](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Kalarchik v. Montana
After a years-long effort by the state of Montana to deny transgender people the right to update their identity documents, two transgender women filed a class-action lawsuit against the state and several of its agencies and officials. 26 states and the District of Columbia issue new birth certificate and do not require sex reassignment surgery nor court order in order to change gender marker, while Montana is one of five states that prohibits any changes.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Kalarchik v. Montana](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Montana
LGBTQ Rights
Kalarchik v. Montana
After a years-long effort by the state of Montana to deny transgender people the right to update their identity documents, two transgender women filed a class-action lawsuit against the state and several of its agencies and officials. 26 states and the District of Columbia issue new birth certificate and do not require sex reassignment surgery nor court order in order to change gender marker, while Montana is one of five states that prohibits any changes.
Aug 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
Montana
May 2024
![TikTok loading on a smart phone screen.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2020/08/WEB20-TikTok-BlogImage-WordPress-1110x740-1-600x400.jpg)
Alario v. Knudsen (Amicus)
In April 2023, Montana’s state legislature passed SB 419, an Act Banning TikTok in Montana. This law imposes a sweeping ban on free expression—one that would prevent everyday Montanans from using TikTok to communicate with immense audiences, access information from around the world, and express themselves. This ban flouts the First Amendment and tramples Montanans’ constitutional right to freedom of speech—that’s why the ACLU, ACLU of Montana, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and a coalition of civil society organizations filed amicus briefs in the district court and the Ninth Circuit urging the courts to block the law from going into effect. Through these briefs, we continue to fight to ensure that no legislature can ban Americans from using an immensely popular platform for online speech based on vague invocations of “national security” or anti-China rhetoric.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![TikTok loading on a smart phone screen.](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2020/08/WEB20-TikTok-BlogImage-WordPress-1110x740-1-600x400.jpg)
Montana
National Security
Alario v. Knudsen (Amicus)
In April 2023, Montana’s state legislature passed SB 419, an Act Banning TikTok in Montana. This law imposes a sweeping ban on free expression—one that would prevent everyday Montanans from using TikTok to communicate with immense audiences, access information from around the world, and express themselves. This ban flouts the First Amendment and tramples Montanans’ constitutional right to freedom of speech—that’s why the ACLU, ACLU of Montana, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and a coalition of civil society organizations filed amicus briefs in the district court and the Ninth Circuit urging the courts to block the law from going into effect. Through these briefs, we continue to fight to ensure that no legislature can ban Americans from using an immensely popular platform for online speech based on vague invocations of “national security” or anti-China rhetoric.
May 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
Montana Supreme Court
May 2024
![Held v. Montana](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Held v. Montana
This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Held v. Montana](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Montana Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice
+2 Issues
Held v. Montana
This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.
May 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case