Revise crime laws
HB 289 aimed to revise Montana's crime laws by expanding the definition of the offense of endangering the welfare of children. The bill sought to include situations where a child is exposed to the production, manufacture, or direct presence of fentanyl, heroin, or cocaine. This would apply to individuals who knowingly engage in these activities in locations where children might reasonably be present. Violations under this specific provision would be classified as a felony, carrying potential penalties of imprisonment, fines, or both.
Bill status
died
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2025
Committee Review
Feb 2025
House Passage
Feb 2025
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Jan 22, 2025
Last action May 22, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 3 comparisons
What changed between versions
HB0289_2(10).pdf
→
HB0289_3.pdf
·
3 edits
MINOR
The bill number was updated from HB 289.2 to HB 289.3, indicating a revision in the legislative process. The most significant substantive change involves expanding the definition of drug paraphernalia to explicitly include items used for the injection, ingestion, or inhalation of methamphetamine, fentanyl, heroin, or cocaine. This clarification strengthens the legal definition to better address modern drug use methods. The text also shows a reorganization of the protective order provisions, though the core legal requirements for orders of protection and penalties for violations appear to remain substantively the same.
Scope change
The bill's scope was slightly expanded by clarifying the definition of drug paraphernalia to explicitly cover items used for injection, ingestion, or inhalation of specific drugs, making the law more precise in addressing current drug consumption methods.
DEFINITION
Drug paraphernalia definition was expanded to explicitly include items used for injection, ingestion, or inhalation of methamphetamine, fentanyl, heroin, or cocaine.
TECHNICAL
Bill number was updated from HB 289.2 to HB 289.3, indicating a revision in the legislative process.
Text structure was reorganized with changes in line numbering and formatting, but core legal provisions for protective orders and penalties appear unchanged.
Floor votes · House Feb 12, 2025
How they voted
100–0
Passed
Total votes 100
Feb 12, 2025
D
Democratic42
100% Yea
R
Republican58
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
31
Key actions
3
Committee
4
Amendments
1
Mar 28, 2025
Amended
(S) Tabled in Committee - (S) Judiciary
upper
Feb 21, 2025
Committee
(S) Referred to Committee - (S) Judiciary
upper
Feb 12, 2025
House · Passed
House Vote: pass (100-0)
house
Feb 3, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Report - (H) Judiciary
lower
Feb 3, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Executive Action - (H) Judiciary
lower
Jan 23, 2025
Committee
(H) Referred to Committee - (H) Judiciary
lower
Jan 22, 2025
Introduced
(H) Introduced
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Courtenay Sprunger
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about HB 289
Scope: MT
Hi! I can help you understand HB 289. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline