Montana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a law passed in 1997 was a violation of separation of powers and allowed Judge Buyske’s ruling to stand. Judge Buyske ruled the statute unconstitutional after the Executive branch had threatened to alter a child support amount on an order that Judge Buyske had issued years prior, and had denied the increase in child support.

Although the Supreme Court upheld Judge Buyske’s action, we believe that the child support agency threatening to overturn the Judge’s order gave Judge Buyske a controversy to produce an injunction against the Executive branches action. But where there is not parties controverting the constitutionality of the statute, the court lacks jurisdiction to overturn the statute. What arguments did the court hear for and against the statute and who brought those arguments? That’s with the caveat that not all states have the strict controversy rule.

Patrick Glynn brought this case to our attention and produced a video on this issue. Points of interest you should explore in this ruling is the separation of powers ruling. Other than that this would not make an order that a judge issued unconstitutional, nor would this case help you overturn your child support statute in your state either.

You can read more here:

https://helenair.com/news/local/supreme-court-agrees-child-support-law-unconstitutional/article_a23a0b23-9bf1-53c0-af2f-de4a7c91d302.html