Requiring judges to invite amicus briefing and allow intervention in certain civil cases
SB 239 would have required district courts to invite local governing bodies to submit "friend of the court" briefs in civil cases that challenge subdivision applications or other land use decisions, specifically when the court is interpreting relevant statutes. This provision aimed to allow local governments, or groups representing them, to offer their perspective on how the law should be interpreted. Additionally, the bill would have permitted these governing bodies, after submitting a brief, to formally join the case (intervene) if an order interpreting the statute was issued, and to request a pause (stay) of that order during an appeal. The bill primarily affects courts, local governing bodies, and parties involved in legal disputes over land use and subdivision regulations.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2025
Committee Review
Apr 2025
Senate Passage
Apr 2025
House Passage
May 2025
Vetoed
May 2025
Introduced Jan 29, 2025
Vetoed May 12, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 2 comparisons
What changed between versions
SB0239_1(5).pdf
→
SB0239_X.pdf
·
2 edits
MINOR
The bill was renumbered from SB 239.1 to SB 239 and updated to reflect its final 'Enrolled' status. The substantive legal text regarding subdivision appeals, amicus briefs, and intervention rights remains unchanged, with only minor formatting adjustments to the line breaks and paragraph spacing.
Scope change
No change in the bill's scope or applicability; the bill continues to govern how governing bodies handle amicus briefs and intervention in subdivision challenges.
TECHNICAL
The bill number was updated from 'SB 239.1' to 'SB 239' and the document header was changed to indicate it is an 'ENROLLED BILL', signifying it has passed both legislative chambers and is ready for signature.
Minor formatting adjustments were made to the text layout, including changes in line breaks and the removal of specific page footer markers found in the draft version.
Floor votes · Senate Feb 24, 2025 · House Apr 11, 2025
How they voted
31–18
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 50
Feb 24, 2025
D
Democratic18
94% Nay
R
Republican32
96% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
36
Key actions
8
Committee
6
May 12, 2025
Vetoed
(S) Vetoed by Governor
upper
May 6, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Signed by Speaker
lower
Apr 21, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Signed by President
upper
Apr 11, 2025
House · Passed
House Vote: pass (54-45-1)
house
Apr 4, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Report - (H) Judiciary
lower
Apr 3, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Executive Action - (H) Judiciary
lower
Feb 25, 2025
Committee
(H) Referred to Committee - (H) Judiciary
lower
Feb 24, 2025
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-18-1)
senate
Feb 18, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Committee Report - (S) Local Government
upper
Feb 17, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Committee Executive Action - (S) Local Government
upper
Jan 30, 2025
Committee
(S) Referred to Committee - (S) Local Government
upper
Jan 29, 2025
Introduced
(S) Introduced
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Forrest Mandeville
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 239
Scope: MT
Hi! I can help you understand SB 239. 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