Montana Court Allows Marital Status in Insurance Premiums

A Montana district court has confirmed that insurance companies in the state can lawfully consider marital status when setting premium rates. The decision, announced on March 10, 2026, marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate about actuarial practices and constitutional rights.

Judge Mike Menahan from the Lewis and Clark County District Court ruled that House Bill 379, enacted in 2021, does not violate the Montana Constitution. This legislation reversed a 1985 law that barred insurers in Montana from using sex or marital status for determining premiums across all types of insurance, supporting insurers' reliance on traditional risk factors. However, consumer advocates are concerned about the implications for socioeconomic equality in insurance pricing.

The Upper Seven Law Firm led the challenge against the law, claiming that House Bill 379 breached the Equal Protection Clause by disproportionately impacting single, divorced, or widowed individuals and unfairly favoring the insurance sector. Judge Menahan's decision stated that marital status does not receive special protection under the state constitution, and only a "legitimate government interest" is required for the law's justification.

State Auditor and Insurance Commissioner James Brown defended the law, highlighting the state's interest in maintaining a competitive insurance market that responds to risk variables. He argued that restricting insurers from considering marital status constituted excessive government interference.

From an industry standpoint, this ruling supports the use of actuarial data and statistical correlations in rate setting. Expert testimony revealed that married couples generally pose lower risk compared to single individuals, based on longstanding data.

While Montana reinstates marital status considerations, other states like Texas and Rhode Island have recently prohibited insurers from increasing premiums solely based on a spouse's death. A comparison of the regulatory landscape shows that:

• Hawaii, Massachusetts, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and California enforce bans or significant restrictions on using marital status in rate setting.
• Montana allows the practice following the court decision, repealing its previous "unisex" law.

Amidst these legal and regulatory changes, the insurance industry continues to face criticism over the broader use of non-driving factors such as credit and geographic location. Research indicates these may disproportionately affect minority communities, with studies showing that drivers from predominantly African American regions may pay substantially higher premiums than those in predominantly white areas. This highlights ongoing challenges in balancing precise risk assessment with equitable pricing across diverse demographic settings.