Montana Squatting Law 2025: Stop Squatters Act Explained

Before this statute, a property owner dealing with an unauthorized occupant generally had to rely on civil eviction procedures, which take time even when the occupant clearly has no legal right to be there.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206, as enacted by Chapter 179, Laws of Montana 2025]

This law creates a distinct criminal offense alongside that civil process, giving law enforcement direct authority to remove someone who meets the statute's elements without a property owner having to complete a full eviction case first.

A person commits this offense by knowingly entering the premises of another without the consent of the owner, rightful occupant, or an authorized representative, and residing there for any period of time.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

All three elements matter: the entry has to be knowing, the consent has to be genuinely absent, and the person has to actually reside there, not just be present temporarily.

The statute requires the person to act knowingly, not merely mistakenly or under a good-faith but incorrect belief that they had permission to be there.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

A property owner pursuing this offense against someone who genuinely, if wrongly, believed they had authorization to occupy the property is dealing with a different legal situation than one involving someone who clearly knew they had no right to be there.

Beyond the misdemeanor classification itself, a person convicted of unlawful squatting owes restitution equal to the fair market rental value for the entire duration of the unlawful occupancy.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

That restitution requirement gives a property owner a defined financial remedy tied directly to how long the unauthorized occupation actually lasted, rather than leaving that loss uncompensated.

Law enforcement may immediately remove a person who commits the offense of unlawful squatting from the premises.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

That's a meaningfully faster remedy than waiting on a civil eviction judgment. A property owner who can show law enforcement that someone meets this offense's elements has a path to removal without first obtaining a court order through the standard eviction process.

The statute doesn't apply to someone who is a guest of an actual tenant, with that tenant's written or verbal authorization.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

That carve-out exists specifically so this criminal statute doesn't accidentally sweep in an ordinary situation, a tenant's visiting family member or roommate's guest, for example, as criminal squatting.

The carve-out protects a guest of a tenant, not a person claiming to be a tenant themselves without a lease, and not necessarily a former tenant whose lease has already ended.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

A property owner or tenant relying on this carve-out needs the underlying tenancy itself to be genuine and current; the protection flows from the tenant's own lawful status, not from the guest's own independent claim to the property.

During the bill's passage, the Montana Budget & Policy Center warned that the expedited removal process could put a tenant in a verbal-lease situation at risk, since removal can be triggered by an on-the-spot law-enforcement determination rather than a full judicial eviction process.

[Cite: Citizen Portal, "Senate bill would create criminal and expedited procedures to remove unlawful occupiers; opponents raise due-process concerns"]

That concern centers on a tenant who has a genuine, lawful tenancy but no written lease to immediately prove it in the moment law enforcement is making a determination on the property.

This criminal statute targets someone who has no lawful basis to be on the property at all, not a dispute over whether a tenant's lease has technically expired or whether rent is owed.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206]

A landlord dealing with an actual tenant, even one whose lease has ended or who is behind on rent, is generally still working within Montana's standard civil eviction process, not this criminal squatting statute, since that person had lawful consent to occupy the unit at some point.

The same legislation created a distinct offense for fraudulently selling or leasing property without holding legal title to it, carrying a fine of at least $1,000 and up to 6 months in county jail.

[Cite: BillTrack50, MT SB101 bill summary]

That's a genuinely different scenario from simply occupying a property without consent. This offense targets someone actively posing as an owner or authorized agent to fraudulently rent or sell property they have no legal right to transfer.

Unlawful squatting covers someone occupying property without permission; fraudulent sale or lease covers someone actively scamming a third party by pretending to have authority to sell or rent property they don't own.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 45-6-206; BillTrack50, MT SB101 bill summary]

A property owner discovering an unauthorized occupant should evaluate which situation actually applies, since a squatter simply living on a property without a scam involved is a different case from someone who fraudulently collected rent from a third party for a property they don't own.

Beyond the criminal offense itself, this legislation enhanced existing Landlord-Tenant Act removal procedures, allowing a sheriff to serve a notice to vacate on an unauthorized occupant based on a property owner's affidavit, outside the traditional civil eviction process.

[Cite: Citizen Portal, "Senate bill would create criminal and expedited procedures to remove unlawful occupiers; opponents raise due-process concerns"]

That's a separate procedural tool from the criminal misdemeanor charge itself, specifically aimed at unauthorized occupants who aren't tenants, giving a property owner an affidavit-based path to sheriff involvement rather than relying solely on criminal charges.

The enrolled bill doesn't include its own specific effective-date clause, so this law follows Montana's default statutory rule: a statute without a stated date takes effect October 1 following its passage and approval.

[Cite: Montana Code Annotated, section 1-2-201]

That's why this law, signed in April 2025, didn't actually become enforceable until October 1, 2025, months after the governor's signature.

The practical starting point is documenting clearly, for any vacant or occupied property, whether an occupant ever had lawful consent to be there, since that distinction determines whether this criminal statute or the standard civil eviction process is the right tool.

For any situation involving a tenant's guest, confirming that the underlying tenancy itself is current and genuine before relying on this statute against an unrelated third party helps avoid misapplying a criminal remedy meant for genuine squatting to what's actually a tenant dispute.