AG Knudsen takes fight to keep law license to state high court
Matt Simons
(CN) — When it comes to the way attorneys talk to judges, how far is too far?
This was the central question before the Montana Supreme Court on Friday as the justices heard arguments in the case against state Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who faces 41 counts of professional misconduct handed down by the state Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
Although Knudsen’s conduct falls short of criminal, justices needled attorneys for both sides on whether the controversial attorney general crossed professional lines when he refused to comply with court orders and made statements publicly attacking the authority of the court.
“The issue is protecting the public's perception of the court. When you have any attorney saying that the court is lying, there's no justification for that,” special counsel Timothy B. Strauch told the court.
Strauch asked the court to affirm his office’s recommendation to suspend Knudsen's law license for 90 days, effectively creating a vacancy in the attorney general's office.
Knudsen claims the accusations infringed his rights to free speech and that serious errors made during his misconduct investigation violated his due process rights. He wants the justices to dismiss the case outright.
Montana Solicitor General Christian Corrigan, who represented Knudsen, implored the court to decline the disciplinary office’s invitation to reignite old controversies, which he said would “rupture the fault lines between branches of government.”
“It's not worth stretching the rules of professional conduct beyond their established limits, simply to punish the attorney general and make an example out of him,” Corrigan told the court.
Knudsen recommended the court issue a “public letter of caution” on the matter instead, stopping short of punishing the attorney general but noting which communications came too close to crossing professional boundaries to watch out for in the future.
The case, first filed in 2023, stems from the attorney general’s conduct in a pair of 2021 court cases where he used incensed language to accuse the court of self-serving action and various examples of “impropriety.”
In response to previous court orders, Knudsen wrote a letter to the court in May 2021 saying its writings “appear to be nothing more than thinly veiled threats and attacks on the professional integrity of attorneys in my office.”
Knudsen also took eight months to comply with a court order instructing him to "immediately" return specific case materials, which the disciplinary office interpreted as a deliberate flaunting of court orders.
Following a disciplinary hearing in October 2024, the disciplinary office recommended a 90-day suspension of Knudsen’s law license. The U.S. Supreme Court had declined Knudsen's request to wade into the case in 2022.
In addition to the statements, the justices criticized Knudsen for voicing his grievances through a letter, which was not included in the court record.
“When somebody wants to bring something to my attention and wants me to rule on something, they file a motion, they file a petition, they ask for a writ. They don't send a letter,” said Montana Supreme Court Chief Justice Cory Swanson.
While skeptical of the attorney general’s arguments, the justices also called the disciplinary office’s case “a mess from start to finish.” In particular, Swanson grilled the disciplinary office on the possibly political nature of the timing of Knudsen’s trial, which happened just weeks before the 2024 general election.
“A whole bunch of their statements and conduct on the front end look bad. The proceedings, ruling on things without him having a chance to respond, issuing this immediately before the election — how is that not — that looks political,” Swanson said.
Other justices said the conduct toed the line but conceded that incensed criticisms aren’t uncommon in their line of work.
“There's a certain amount of criticism that we have to take as judges. It comes with the territory,” Justice Laurie McKinnon said, and expressed concern for the new standard the court will set with its decision, especially if the standard is “hurt feelings.”
“If this is the standard that applies for the next 40 years, is this really the standard that we want to apply to attorneys in this state?” McKinnon asked.
In his final remarks to the court, Corrigan said Knudsen's conduct fell within “the acceptable bounds of practice.”
“I think what the court should do now is do what no branch of government did in 2021 — and that's turn down the temperature and allow everyone to move on by dismissing the complaint,” Corrigan, a onetime Department of Education attorney in the first Trump administration, said.
The court did not indicate when it will rule.
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel is part of a comprehensive lawyer regulation system established by the Montana Supreme Court. The office investigates and prosecutes complaints against lawyers that are within the jurisdiction of the court