The Montana Libertarian Party is speaking out about the outcome of its U.S. Senate primary after Tom Jandron lost to Kyle Austin, whom the party is calling a “phony candidate” who does not represent libertarian principles.
Unofficial results from the Montana Secretary of State’s office show Austin defeated Jandron 1,795 votes to 1,579, or roughly 53 percent to 47 percent, in Tuesday’s Libertarian primary for U.S. Senate. The outcome drew an immediate response from the state party, which had backed Jandron in the primary following its nominating convention in Helena earlier this year.
In a statement dated June 3, the Montana Libertarian Party said Jandron earned its endorsement after an extensive process that included meetings with both primary candidates, a town hall, a questionnaire and written evaluation, and further deliberation by party members and leadership. The party said delegates unanimously backed Jandron as the candidate who best reflected its principles.
It said its members also had “serious concerns” about Austin, who the party noted previously ran as a Republican during the 2024 election cycle. The Montana Libertarian Party said it found Austin lacked both a clear understanding of key Libertarian policy priorities and a “cohesive philosophical framework,” and accused him of running under the Libertarian label to take advantage of the party’s statewide ballot access.
The party further criticized Montana’s open primary system more generally. Montana does not register voters by party, and any eligible voter may participate in any single party’s primary. The state party contends that this leaves it unable to know whether voters who are participating in its primary share its principles or are acting in bad faith.
“Any registered voter — Democrat, Republican, or otherwise — can walk into a polling place, request a Libertarian ballot, and determine who carries the Libertarian banner in the general election, all without the party ever learning their identity,” the party stated.
The Montana Libertarian Party said the result reflects a larger problem for political parties and their ability to defend associational rights. It also expressed frustration that its continued statewide ballot access now depends on Austin’s candidacy because U.S. Senate is the only statewide race on the ballot this cycle.
The party lamented this is not the first time it has faced such a situation, comparing it to the 2022 election cycle, when it was put in a position where it needed to publicly oppose Sam Rankin, the Libertarian nominee for Montana’s 2nd Congressional District. IPR was unable to find a previous statement of denunciation, though the party has previously referenced the situation.
“These episodes demonstrate a structural and constitutional flaw: despite maintaining ballot access, Montana Libertarians too often lack meaningful control over who carries the party label and speaks on their behalf,” the party stated. “This flaw has substantially burdened the political activity of the party, ruined the image of the party, undermined faith in the electoral process, and chilled the speech of members who would otherwise run for office as Libertarians.”
At its most recent convention, the party said it adopted a platform amendment stating that political parties have the right to determine their own membership, endorsements, and procedures free from state interference, including mandated open primaries. However, it’s worth noting that such an amendment has no teeth under state law in which to enforce it.
The party is now considering “all options” to protect its candidate selection process and ensure future nominees reflect the views of Montana Libertarians.
Chris,
Agreed completely.
Funny – over the years, LP national convention attendees made a habit of picking former Republicans who barely had an understanding of libertarianism (see Bob Barr and Bill Weld for two examples) and bailed minutes after losing their race as a Libertarian. So, I’m not going to criticize Montana voters for doing the same thing.
Richard: Thank you for that clarification. I was working from the party’s statement, so I wonder if they intended that to mean they’re relying on Austin’s result to extend that current recognition into the 2030 cycle.
It would be interesting to know what efforts the Jandron campaign and the Montana Libertarian Party made to win the primary. The fact of primaries violating freedom of association, not to mention being welfare for political parties, is certainly true. Primaries should be abolished. But as long as they exist the LP should use them to our advantage and should be ready to put forth strenuous effort to avoid having a usurper snatch away a nomination.
LPMT needs to go examine the applicable Tashjian v. Republican Party, 479 U.S. 208 (1986):
Holding 1-a: “The freedom of association protected by those [First and Fourteenth] Amendments includes partisan political organization. Section 9-431 places limits upon the group of registered voters whom the Party may invite to participate in the “basic function” of selecting the Party’s candidates. The State thus limits the Party’s associational opportunities at the crucial juncture at which the appeal to common principles may be translated into concerted action, and hence to political power in the community. The fact that the State has the power to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections does not justify, without more, the abridgment of fundamental rights, such as the right to vote or, as here, the freedom of political association.” (emphasis added)
In other words, the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendments apply for the freedom of association of political parties to decide who their candidates are and who may vote in their primary. If a state requires open primaries for a political party, then that party’s rights are being violated. LPMT has a legitimate case here.
(Granted, the surface appearance of the LPMT endorsing a candidate over another before the nomination is decided is troubling, but details are also missing as to why and how that happened.)
The Libertarian Party’s ballot access does not depend on the US Senate race this year. In 2024 Roger Roots got enough votes for Clerk of the Montana Supreme Court to guarantee ballot access in both 2026 and 2028. When a party passes the vote test in Montana, it gets the next two elections. And it’s fairly easy to pass the vote test in presidential years, because all of Montana’s statewide executive posts except one are always up in presidential years. It is easy to pass the vote test for those offices.