Abstract This Article examines one of the most important state court cases ever decided. In Montana ex rel. Cashmore v. Anderson, the Montana Supreme Court exercised its original jurisdiction to order, by a 3-2 margin, that the state’s original constitution be replaced with one the people apparently had failed to ratify. In doing so, the court yielded to interest groups that favored replacing the original state constitution with an instrument based on radically different premises. Political threats may have caused the swing justice to vote for the new constitution, but even if that did not occur, the case represents a striking example of the failure of the rule of law. The Article also proposes reforms that may reduce the chances of a recurrence.

中文翻译：

---

政变？颁布蒙大拿州新宪法的案子

摘要本文探讨了有史以来最重要的州法院案件之一。在蒙大拿州 Cashmore诉Anderson一案，蒙大拿州最高法院以3到2的比例行使了其原来的管辖权，下令以该州的原始宪法替换为显然没有批准的宪法。这样做，法院屈服于利益集团，主张以根本不同的前提为基础的工具取代原始的国家宪法。政治威胁可能导致摇摆不定的法官投票支持新宪法，但即使没有发生，此案仍是法治失败的一个鲜明例子。该条还提出了可能减少再次发生机会的改革措施。