Supreme Court Race Highlights Clear Choice: Biological Reality vs. Progressive Ideology
Judge Dan Wilson protects women’s safety — while liberal activists on the court push dangerous delusions
Rep. Amy Regier recently published an excellent opinion piece that clearly lays out the stark differences between the two candidates running for the Montana Supreme Court: Judge Dan Wilson and Judge Amy Eddy.
In one recent case, a male convict with a significant criminal history (including assault) asked to be housed in a women’s prison after identifying as female. Judge Dan Wilson firmly rejected this request. He ruled based on biological reality — noting the inmate “is and remains both genetically and anatomically male” and posed a risk to female inmates.
Contrast that with the Montana Supreme Court’s recent ruling (driven by liberal justices), which threw out Montana’s common-sense law that prohibited people from changing their sex on official government documents. This decision prioritizes feelings over biological facts and opens the door to widespread abuse of women’s spaces, sports, and safety.
As Rep. Regier correctly points out, this is not “progress” — it is a dangerous distortion of truth with real-world consequences for women and girls across Montana.
Judge Dan Wilson has shown he will uphold objective reality and protect public safety.
Amy Eddy represents the activist mindset that ignores biology and endangers vulnerable populations.
This race matters. The Montana Supreme Court has far-reaching power over our laws, our rights, and the safety of Montana families.
Gallatin County Republicans stand with Rep. Amy Regier and strongly support Judge Dan Wilson for the Montana Supreme Court.
We need judges who base decisions on facts and the law — not on progressive ideology.
Read Rep. Amy Regier’s full opinion piece here: Ruling highlights differences in Supreme Court candidates
Vote for common sense and public safety this June 2.
