Attorneys for U.S. Rep. Greg Gianforte have renewed their arguments that the congressman shouldn’t have to have his mug shot and fingerprints taken as part of his misdemeanor assault conviction.

Gianforte has filed a motion objecting to Gallatin County Justice Court Judge Rick West’s order that he provide booking information after pleading guilty in June to assaulting Guardian newspaper reporter Ben Jacobs on the eve of Montana’s special election.

The 56-year-old tech entrepreneur received a six-month deferred sentence and was ordered to complete 40 hours of community service, 20 hours of anger management and pay $385 in fines and fees. West also told Gianforte to report to the Gallatin County jail to give booking information, including fingerprints and a mug shot. The defense objected.

In a written motion filed after the hearing, defense attorneys Bill Mercer of Billings and Todd Whipple of Bozeman argued that state law doesn’t give Justice Court judges discretion to order fingerprints or photographs of defendants.

While state law does allow a judge to order photographs and fingerprints of defendants charged with felonies or defendants who have been arrested for most misdemeanor offenses, neither was the case for Gianforte, his attorneys argued.

Last week, Gallatin County Attorney Marty Lambert responded to the congressman’s motion, saying that Gianforte’s motion should be denied.

“This Court apparently found that fingerprinting and photographing (Gianforte) was a reasonable condition needed for rehabilitation or for the protection of the victim or society,” Lambert wrote. “If so, (Gianforte) should obey this court’s order.”

On Friday, Gianforte’s attorneys filed a reply to the county attorney, again arguing that the judge doesn’t have discretion to order a mug shot and fingerprints in Gianforte’s case.

“While the State assumes that the Court ‘apparently’ found fingerprinting and photographing of Mr. Gianforte necessary, the Court did not make any findings related to Mr. Gianforte’s history, background or recent conduct that would justify such a condition or restriction,” the defense wrote in their reply. “It cannot be argued that fingerprints and photographs are reasonable and necessary for Mr. Gianforte’s rehabilitation, public safety, or the safety of Mr. Jacobs.”

It’s unclear when West will rule on Gianforte’s motion. West could schedule a hearing if he believes more testimony on the motion is warranted, although one hasn’t been scheduled yet. He also could rule based on the arguments already filed.