Missoula, MT— A bill that would have mandated federal law enforcement agencies to notify county sheriffs before conducting arrests, searches, or seizures in their jurisdictions was rejected by the Montana House of Representatives on Friday. The proposal, known as House Bill 439, fell short with a 44-56 vote, with 14 Republicans and all House Democrats opposing the measure.
Sponsored by Rep. Lee Deming (R-Laurel), the bill, referred to as the “Sheriffs First Initiative,” aimed to improve communication between federal and local law enforcement in Montana. Supporters argued that the bill was necessary to ensure local sheriffs were informed about federal actions within their counties, helping to maintain officer safety and coordination.
The bill would have required federal law enforcement officers to inform the local county sheriff prior to any arrests, searches, or seizures. If a federal official believed there could be a conflict of interest with the sheriff, the bill would have mandated that they notify the state attorney general instead. Rep. Deming introduced the bill in response to a 2023 federal search at a gun shop in Great Falls, where local law enforcement, including the Cascade County sheriff, was not notified in advance of the federal operation.
Initially, HB 439 required sheriffs to give written permission for federal actions within their jurisdictions, and it introduced felony penalties for federal officials who failed to comply. After receiving feedback from sheriffs, Deming amended the bill to simply require notification, rather than written consent, before a federal operation.
Deming defended the bill, calling it a matter of common sense and an effort to promote cooperation between federal and local authorities. “You know, we can’t force the federal government to do anything — well, how about just cooperate with us?” Deming said.
Supporters of the bill included Rep. Shane Klakken (R-Grass Range), a former U.S. Customs and Border Protection pilot, who emphasized the safety benefits of the proposal. Klakken recounted an incident where local law enforcement was unaware of a federal operation, creating a potential safety risk. “Luckily we saw it, we were able to let people know what’s going on – this is an officer safety issue,” Klakken explained.
However, opponents of the bill argued that it could disrupt federal law enforcement operations and overstep the state’s authority. Rep. Bill Mercer (R-Billings), a former U.S. attorney for Montana, pointed out that similar proposals had been rejected in the past, stating that the existing communication between federal and local law enforcement already works effectively. “The ‘deconfliction’ that is mentioned in Section 2 and the ‘maximum cooperation’ that’s mentioned in Section 1 is happening in your communities already,” Mercer said.
Rep. John Fitzpatrick (R-Anaconda) also voiced concerns, suggesting that the bill would infringe on the relationships between federal and local law enforcement in Montana, which he argued were generally functioning well. Fitzpatrick cautioned that the bill would likely be struck down in court if challenged. “If this bill were to be challenged in court, I think its life expectancy would be about ten nanoseconds,” he said.
Despite the defeat of HB 439, the debate over the relationship between federal and local law enforcement in Montana is likely to continue, as lawmakers and law enforcement officials weigh the benefits and drawbacks of further regulatory oversight.
