Katie Lane

On February 12, 2026, President Trump nominated Katie Lane to the United States District Court for the District of Montana. She was confirmed on June 2, 2026.

View/download the fact sheet here.
View/download the letter of opposition here.

Biography

Lane received a B.A. in Economics from Furman University in 2014, and a J.D. from the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School in 2017.

Legal Experience

From 2017 through 2020, Lane clerked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. She served as an associate at Jones Day in 2021 and then as deputy solicitor general under Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen from 2021 to 2023. Knudsen noted, “During her two years in my office as deputy solicitor general, Katie played an integral role … challenging the Biden administration’s unconstitutional mandates.” She then worked for two years as an associate at Consovoy McCarthy PLLC in Arlington, Virginia, and most recently served as senior legal counsel at the Republican National Committee.

Key Facts & Context

Professional and Legal Associations 

District of Columbia Bar Association (admitted 2017); Montana Bar Association (admitted 2021, New Lawyers Section Chair, 2021-2022); Federalist Society (2015 – Present)

• Received public rebuke for disobeying court orders
  Lane she received a rare public rebuke and punishment for disobeying court orders and misrepresenting facts to a court of law. While leading the charge at the Montana Attorney General’s office, Judge Moses insisted that the government pay reasonable attorneys’ fees for the entirety of the litigation because of the state’s misconduct, disobedience, and bad faith conduct, as well as outlandish arguments used throughout the case.
• Attacked voting rights and access to the polls 
  Lane defended the Jefferson County Commission’s redistricted 2021 map, which Black voters alleged constituted an unlawful racial gerrymander intended to dilute their voting power. The District Court sided with the Black voters, concluding that the Commission violated the Voting Rights Act, which ensures that Black voters and other historically marginalized groups have the fundamental right to have their voices heard in elections. Despite this loss, Lane’s firm has continued its ongoing appeal in the case.Lane then actively intervened in another ongoing case, where she made disingenuous and harmful arguments defending Montana’s so-called “double voting” provision. Montana’s attempt to limit “double voting” was nothing more than imposing unreasonable penalties on those who were registered to vote in more than one state, not those who were actually casting a ballot in more than one state. Lane handled the appellate briefing before the Ninth Circuit and presented oral argument. The case later settled but remains a concerning exemplar of the lengths that Lane will go to make voting more difficult for everyday people.
• Supported efforts to harm and vilify the LGBTQ+ population 
  While working at the Montana Attorney General’s office, Lane argued that Mr. Menges should be registered as a sex offender there, since he had been convicted of the “crime” of having sex with another man in Idaho (under an outdated and harmful anti-sodomy law). As the briefing’s primary drafter, Lane argued that the Montana statute requiring Mr. Menges to register as a sex offender was “neutral on its face.” Luckily, the case later settled, and Mr. Menges was not forced to register as a sex offender simply for acting on his sexuality, despite Lane’s many attempts to ensure a different outcome.
• Loudly advocates against access to reproductive care
  Three decades after a permanent injunction was placed on Guam’s total ban on abortions from the 1990s, Guam Attorney General filed a motion to try and block access to abortion care in the territory. Lane was directly involved in this attack, serving as counsel on the case. Thanks to a Ninth Circuit decision, access to abortion remains legal in Guam. These attacks demonstrate Lane’s continued practice of wasting courtroom time to make outlandish arguments simply to further right-wing ideological goals.During Lane’s tenure as the assistant solicitor general in the Montana Attorney General’s office, she asked the Montana Supreme Court to overturn a 23-year old precedent that created the state’s constitutional right to abortion. Citing the precedent as “fundamentally broken,” Lane initiated the suit to try and protect three controversial, restrictive abortion laws that the Montana legislature had recently passed. Lane has no concern over whether the arguments she makes are fair, accurate, or even constitutional. She simply abuses her power to achieve political goals, an approach that is not fitting for someone seeking a lifetime position on the judiciary.