Lawmakers approve bill restricting display of some flags on public property
In this March 15, 2021, file photo, demonstrators gather on the steps of the Montana State Capitol protesting anti-LGBTQ+ legislation in Helena. (Thom Bridge/Independent Record via AP, File)
A law prohibiting the display of certain flags and banners on government property passed the Montana Legislature on Tuesday.
House Bill 819 restricts flags and banners that “represent a political viewpoint” from being displayed on grounds owned or leased by state, county and local governments, including public schools, universities, courthouses and administrative buildings. Among the list of banned flags are any motifs that pertain to a specific race, sexual orientation, or gender, including Black Lives Matter flags and flags representing members of the LGBTQ+ community.
Republican lawmakers showed resounding support for the measure, which was introduced by Rep. Braxton Mitchell, R-Columbia Falls, arguing that some restriction was necessary to preserve government unity.
“I was thrilled whenever the pro-life movement got our flag suspended in the rotunda, but I would be willing to give that up if we could tone down the polarization in this building,” said Sen. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton. “I would give up the pro-life flag along with the rainbow flag, myself.”
Democrats in both chambers claimed the measure was chaotic, contradictory and potentially unconstitutional. During an April 18 hearing on the Senate floor, Sen. Ellie Boldman, D-Missoula, declared the bill “a First Amendment nightmare.”
She focused on the bill’s definition of a flag as “any physical or digital material designed for display on a flagpole, building, wall, vehicle, or other structure,” questioning whether a picture of a rainbow on a teacher’s door or a cross decal on a student’s locker might be prohibited under the law.
“We know this is going to be a lawsuit,” said Boldman.
Lawmakers disagreed on whether a later section of the bill stating restrictions only applied to official government displays effectively preserved personal expressions of free speech if they occur on government property.
Other lawmakers pointed to the inclusion of the Gadsden flag under a list of allowable displays as evidence of the legislation’s bias. While the so-called “Don’t Tread on Me” flag originated as a symbol against British tyranny during the Revolutionary War and is still widely in use today -- it graces a Montana license plate design, for example -- the rattlesnake motif also has been adopted by extremist movements.
When questioned on the House floor, Mitchell conceded that the Confederate flag could also be considered a flag of historical significance, making it an allowable display under HB 819. He refused to answer subsequent inquiries regarding what other flags might be considered historically significant.
Rep. Marilyn Marler, D-Missoula, questioned why the law would protect two flags meant to depict resistance to government authority while barring LGBTQ+ pride flags, which she described as a sign of inclusivity.
“Call it what it is,” she said of the bill. “It does not treat all viewpoints equally.”
Some tribal nations also voiced opposition to the bill’s list of allowable flags, which includes the official flag of federally recognized tribes but excludes other symbols important to tribal identity such as specific clan flags and the flag of the Blackfoot Confederacy.
The bill passed through both Houses along party lines and is now pending approval from the governor.
Reporter Hailey Smalley can be reached at hsmalley@dailyinterlake.com or 758-4433.