A proposal to limit the legislature’s power to alter or repeal measures passed by initiative should not be on Missouri’s November ballot because it “impermissibly constricts” the legislative freedom to make new laws reflecting new views, a Cole County judge ruled Wednesday.
The proposal, which would be Amendment 6 on the Nov. 3 ballot if Wednesday’s decision is reversed on appeal, violates the Missouri Constitution by combining multiple subjects and its limits on future freedom, Circuit Judge Daniel Green ruled.
“Instead of addressing a single subject, tied to a single article in the Missouri Constitution, (the initiative) makes sweeping reforms affecting multiple provisions of the Missouri Constitution,” Green wrote.
Green ruled a day after conducting a one-hour trial on Secretary of State Denny Hoskins’ decision not to allow the proposal on the ballot. The ruling upheld all of Hoskins’ reasons for denying a ballot slot to the initiative proposed by the political action committee Respect MO Voters.
Respect MO Voters turned in 335,000 signatures and local election authorities found there were enough to qualify for the ballot.
Respect MO Voters immediately appealed Green’s decision to the Western District Court of Appeals. That would be where it would stay in most situations but the Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday reached beyond the appeals court to take an appeal in a redistricting referendum lawsuit directly from the circuit court.
The appeal process must be finished by Sept. 8, the last day for courts to add measures to the November ballot.
In his ruling, Green zeroed in on provisions that protect citizen-led initiative laws and constitutional amendments passed since Jan. 1, 2010. The initiative would have required lawmakers to muster an 80% majority vote to place proposals changing the terms of those laws and constitutional amendments before voters.
The initiative would not have repealed any legislative changes made prior to its passage. It was intended to address future actions such as the 2025 bill that repealed paid sick leave for Missouri workers and inflation adjustments to the minimum wage.
“That backward looking provision regulates a wide range of subjects-including Medicaid expansion, right to work, marijuana, and others,” Green wrote. “The text of the measure does not even alert voters to these substantial changes.”
Green also ruled that Hoskins was correct to review the initiative for its acceptability under sections of the constitution that are not directly related to initiative proposals.
Hoskins blocked the proposal from the ballot for his opinion that it violated the third section of Missouri’s Bill of Rights, which is the first article of the Constitution.
That section states that Missourians have “the inherent, sole and exclusive right” to abolish the current state government and create a new one, or make major changes, whenever they deem the time is right, “provided such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.
One provision of the proposal, Green wrote, would prevent future lawmakers from repassing bills rejected by a referendum or asking voters to reconsider by putting the same or similar legislation on a future ballot without achieving an 80% majority in both chambers.
“Today’s voters have the right to consider amendments proposed by the General Assembly;” Green wrote, “today’s voters cannot strip that right from future voters to insulate the current majority’s policy preferences from future reconsideration.”
This story will be updated.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.