Senate Reviews Mercer for Montana Federal Court Position

WASHINGTON — Montana Rep. Bill Mercer appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday for his nomination hearing to serve as a federal judge for the District of Montana, marking a significant step forward in his confirmation process.

Daines delivered prepared remarks supporting Mercer’s nomination before the committee, chaired by Senator Chuck Grassley, emphasizing the nominee’s extensive legal background and Montana roots.

“It is great to be here today with you all to speak in support of my friend, Mr. William Mercer and his nomination to serve as the next Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana,” Daines said in his opening remarks.

The senator highlighted Mercer’s lifelong connection to Montana, noting they were high school rivals who “debated each other in speech and debate” in Billings.

“Bill has served Montana and his country in various roles over the past three decades,” Daines told the committee. “In Montana, he served as U.S. Attorney for the District of Montana from 2001 to 2009 and has represented Billings in the Montana House of Representatives for the past seven years.”

Daines emphasized Mercer’s federal experience, including his service as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General and Acting Associate Attorney General during the George W. Bush administration.

Governor Greg Gianforte issued a statement Tuesday praising Trump’s nomination of Mercer and urging swift Senate confirmation.

“President Trump has made a strong decision in nominating Bill Mercer to serve as a District Court Judge for the District of Montana,” Gianforte said. “With Bill’s distinguished legal career and his life-long commitment to public service, I’m proud to support his nomination.”

The governor noted Mercer’s experience in the Montana House of Representatives and expressed confidence that “Bill will serve Montana well and apply the Constitution as our Founders intended.”

“I urge the Senate to swiftly confirm him to serve Montana in this new capacity,” Gianforte added.

During his introduction, Daines detailed Mercer’s legal credentials, noting he has been a member of the Montana Bar for 32 years and has appeared in numerous civil and criminal cases as lead counsel in state and federal courts.

“He has also represented clients in appellate courts, which resulted in oral argument in 15 cases in the Courts of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, D.C. Circuit, and the Montana Supreme Court,” Daines said.

The senator praised Mercer’s recognition by legal peers, stating he has “been rated among the best lawyers in Montana for environmental and commercial litigation.”

Daines concluded by expressing confidence in Mercer’s qualifications alongside Senator Tim Sheehy.

“Senator Sheehy and I are confident Bill is the top choice to once again serve Montana, this time as our Federal Judge,” Daines said. “His time at the Department of Justice, as U.S. Attorney, and as a state legislator have prepared him well, and I can’t think of a better pick to represent us once again in this new role.”

As previously reported by Western Montana News, Trump announced Mercer’s nomination on July 10, calling it his “Great Honor” to nominate the Montana legislator to the federal bench.

During the hearing, Mercer faced questioning from committee members, including Senator John Kennedy, who posed hypothetical constitutional questions about federal versus local government authority.

When Kennedy asked whether Congress could constitutionally pass a law taking over local zoning authority from cities, Mercer responded that such federal action would not be constitutional.

“I don’t believe it would be,” Mercer said. “I believe that’s the sort of thing that the constitution has not given Congress the authority under Article One to do that, and in fact, in our system of federalism those things that are not set forth in the constitution reserve to the states.”

Mercer explained that zoning represents “quintessential public health, safety, welfare matters that we reserve to local government to resolve.”

Kennedy also questioned Mercer about potential constitutional limits on local government authority, including scenarios involving excessive building permit fees, testing the nominee’s understanding of takings clause jurisprudence under the Fifth Amendment.

When Kennedy asked whether a local government could charge $50,000 for a building permit, Mercer initially said he believed local government would have that authority and that it would be constitutional.

“I believe, Senator, I believe it would be,” Mercer said. “I think that they could establish that they need in order to engage in the permitting process and go through what they need to do as a local government. I doubt very much whether that would be a violation under a compensible taking under the fifth amendment.”

However, when Kennedy cited the Supreme Court case Sheets v. County of El Dorado, where the Court struck down a $23,420 building permit fee, Mercer acknowledged he was unfamiliar with that precedent.

Kennedy then pressed Mercer on whether local government actions could “step over the line” at some point, and Mercer agreed they could, acknowledging such actions could violate the takings clause.

Mercer’s nomination hearing represents a crucial step in the confirmation process. Following committee consideration, his nomination will advance to a full Senate vote if approved by the Judiciary Committee.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana handles federal cases throughout the state, including constitutional issues and interstate disputes.