The Supreme Court has opted not to hear a case from Montana regarding state election laws that are underpinned by the controversial independent state legislature theory, a decision that could impact the interpretation of election regulations nationwide. This development follows the court's previous ruling in 2023, where they largely dismissed the theory that would have granted state legislatures unchallenged control over election laws, restricting judicial review by state courts.

Montana Secretary of State Christi Jacobsen, a Republican, had sought the court's intervention following a split decision from the state’s highest court that invalidated two GOP-backed election laws aimed at restricting paid ballot collection and same-day voter registration. Jacobsen argued that these laws were essential for maintaining legislative control over electoral processes, asserting that only state lawmakers should govern election protocols. Her appeal was backed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee and other Republican state attorneys general.

Conversely, the Montana Democratic Party contended that the laws would disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, including Native Americans and the elderly, by making it more difficult for them to vote. The Montana Supreme Court had ruled that these laws infringed upon the voting rights as protected by the state constitution.

The Supreme Court's decision comes amidst broader debates about the role of state courts in handling election-related cases. While the court affirmed that state courts could not wholly disregard legislative authority, it left open questions regarding the extent of judicial oversight, suggesting that legal battles over electoral practices may continue for the foreseeable future.

By not hearing this case, the Supreme Court effectively allows the lower court's ruling to stand, which has implications for election law on both state and national levels, as challenges to election legislation remain a hot-button issue across the United States.