Kalispell District Court Judge Amy Eddy will join the Montana Supreme Court after defeating fellow Flathead judge Dan Wilson in Tuesday’s nonpartisan race, the Associated Press called late election night.
With about 75 percent of the vote counted when the race was called, Eddy led roughly 61 percent to 39 percent. She held that margin for most of the evening and never trailed in the reported returns.
Both candidates sit on the district court bench in Kalispell. Neither had won a seat on the state’s high court before. Wilson ran against Associate Justice Katherine Bidegaray in 2024 and lost.
The seat is one of the few statewide races Montana runs without party labels on the ballot. That did not keep partisan money and endorsements out of the campaign, and it did not stop voters from sending a separate message about how judicial races should work.
Two judges, different coalitions
Wilson had the Montana Republican Party’s backing and appeared as a keynote speaker at Republican functions. He framed the race as a chance to push back on what he called a leftward tilt on the Supreme Court and said his courtroom experience would keep the bench grounded in the text of the law.
Eddy said she took money from Democratic groups and individuals as well as Republicans, and cast herself as committed to a nonpartisan bench. She argued that district court work — criminal calendars, civil trials, parenting disputes — is the training ground that matters most for appellate judgment.
Both candidates said they would uphold the Montana Constitution. The gap was less about résumé length than about which political networks were willing to spend on them.
CI-132 on the same ballot
Voters sent a related signal the same night. Constitutional Initiative 132, which amends the state Constitution to require that judicial elections remain nonpartisan, passed by a wide margin, leading by about 140,000 votes when the AP called it.
Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts, the group behind CI-132, said judges should be chosen on records and qualifications, not party brands. The Montana Republican Party had opposed the measure, arguing that open party affiliation would make judicial races more honest.
Eddy’s win and CI-132’s passage land together: a new justice elected under the current nonpartisan system, and a constitutional lock on keeping that system in place.
What the court actually decides
Montana’s Supreme Court is the final stop for criminal appeals, civil disputes and constitutional challenges that shape how agencies, counties and the Legislature operate. Recent terms have covered public lands, election rules, utility regulation and the reach of ballot initiatives.
Eddy will take office when the new term begins. Wilson returns to the district court calendar in Kalispell. The first signs of how the court’s lineup shifts will show up in orders and signed opinions, not in the ads that filled Flathead Valley screens this fall.
Flathead County has become a regular feeder for statewide judicial races. Having two Kalispell judges on the same ballot underlined how much of Montana’s appellate pipeline now runs through the northwest. Eddy’s move to Helena leaves a district court vacancy that the governor will fill, starting another confirmation fight before her name ever appears on an opinion caption.
Court watchers will look first at closely divided cases already teed up for argument. A single new vote can change the outcome of property, water and election disputes that sit for months before they are submitted. Eddy’s district court record is public; the Supreme Court record starts blank on day one.
Nonpartisan in name is not the same as nonpartisan in funding, and this race made that plain. CI-132 locks the ballot label. It does not lock the independent expenditure committees that will keep spending on judicial contests. Eddy’s first term will unfold under that tension: a Constitution that says no party line, and a campaign finance system that still sorts judges by who writes the checks.
Add The Montana Statesman as a preferred source on Google (opens in a new tab)