A Montana immigration advocacy group has filed a lawsuit against the state over a law that allows law enforcement to check the immigration status of individuals during routine stops, like when someone is pulled over for a traffic violation. The law that took effect Wednesday allows officers to “make a reasonable attempt, upon reasonable suspicion … to determine the immigration status of an individual.” Valley Neighbors of the Flathead argues the law violates the state Constitution. While federal law allows officers to use “reasonable suspicion” to investigate potential crimes unrelated to the reason for the stop, Montana’s Constitution requires a higher standard of “particularized suspicion.”
HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Flathead-based immigration advocacy organization is suing the state of Montana to block a 2025 law that allows law enforcement to check the immigration status of individuals during routine stops, like when someone is pulled over for a traffic violation.
House Bill 278, brought by Rep. Nelly Nicol, R-Billings, expands law enforcement’s purview during stops, enabling officers to “make a reasonable attempt, upon reasonable suspicion and when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.”
The law took effect Wednesday.
In the lawsuit filed Tuesday by Valley Neighbors of the Flathead in Lewis and Clark County District Court, Upper Seven Law, a nonprofit law firm based in Helena, argued that the law violates the Montana Constitution.
The lawsuit maintains that prolonging a stop to investigate a person’s immigration status is illegal in Montana. While federal law allows officers to use “reasonable suspicion” to investigate potential crimes unrelated to the reason for a stop, Montana’s Constitution requires “particularized suspicion,” a higher standard.
Andres Halady, an attorney at Upper Seven Law, also argued that the new law effectively enables police to detain individuals for unlawful presence in the United States, which is a civil offense, not a crime.
“No standard, whether it’s ‘reasonable suspicion’ or ‘particularized suspicion,’ should allow that,” Haladay said in an interview Wednesday with Montana Free Press. “But certainly the Montana Constitution does not tolerate that.”
The lawsuit also alleges the law violates Montana’s explicit right to privacy and allows the discrimination of individuals based on race and national origin.
During the 2025 legislative session, Nicol dismissed allegations that the bill would lead to racial profiling, arguing the legislation only allows officers to investigate immigration status, but doesn’t require it. Nicol framed the initiative as an opportunity for the Montana Highway Patrol to prevent human trafficking.
Nicol did not respond to requests for comment on the lawsuit Wednesday.
The bill passed the Legislature generally along party lines. Speaker of the House Rep. Brandon Ler, R-Savage, Wednesday called the lawsuit “disappointing but not surprising.”
“Opponents are once again turning to the courts to block the work of the Legislature and the will of Montanans,” Ler said in a statement to MTFP. “We will not back down from enabling law enforcement to do their jobs keeping our communities safe.”
Recent Montana immigration arrests stemming from traffic stops include Christopher Martinez Marvin in Helena and eight individuals in Whitefish.
Valley Neighbors of the Flathead, which promotes cultural inclusivity and connects immigrants to resources, drew ire from congressional Republicans in 2024.
Upper Seven has repeatedly brought lawsuits challenging policies adopted by Montana’s Republican-controlled state government in recent years, sometimes drawing criticism from elected Republicans.
___
This story was originally published by the Montana Free Press and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.