Why did the Missouri AG reject the form of Winston Apple's 2019 Article III §52 initiative petition (file 2020-094)?
Plain-English summary
Petition 2020-094 was a Winston Apple proposal to amend Article III, Section 52 of the Missouri Constitution. § 116.050 RSMo requires every initiative petition that amends existing constitutional or statutory text to enclose deleted matter in brackets and underline new matter, so that voters and election officials can see at a glance what the petition adds and what it removes. Apple's petition did not do that.
AG Schmitt rejected the petition for that drafting defect alone. The opinion is explicit that the AG did not look for any other problems once the bracketing-and-underlining defect was found. Under § 116.332.4 RSMo, the Secretary of State retained authority to review the AG's rejection and make a final decision on form.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2019. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Common questions
Q: What is the bracketing-and-underlining rule, and why does it matter?
A: § 116.050 RSMo requires the petition to show "all matter which is to be deleted included in its proper place enclosed in brackets and all new matter shown underlined." The point is transparency: a voter signing the petition or reading the constitution-as-amended can see precisely which words go away and which words are added. Without that, the petition's textual effect is opaque, and the form review fails.
Q: Could the proponent fix the defect and resubmit?
A: Yes. Form rejection is not on the merits; it is a drafting compliance issue. Apple could (and historically did) refile a corrected version. The opinions immediately after this one in the sequence include other Apple petitions that cleared form review.
Q: Why didn't the AG also assess substantive sufficiency?
A: § 116.332 only requires form sufficiency review. Once a fatal form defect appears, the analysis stops. The AG explicitly noted: "Because of our rejection of the form of the petition for the reasons stated above, we have not reviewed the petition to determine whether additional deficiencies exist."
Q: What is the Secretary of State's role at this stage?
A: § 116.332.4 RSMo lets the Secretary of State review the AG's opinion and make a final decision approving or rejecting form. The Secretary is not bound by the AG's view.
Q: Did this petition reach the ballot?
A: No, not in this form. The 2020-094 number was not certified for circulation as drafted.
Background and statutory framework
Chapter 116 RSMo lays out the initiative-petition pipeline. This opinion sits at step 2:
- Proponent files the petition with the Secretary of State.
- AG reviews sufficiency as to form under § 116.332 RSMo (this opinion).
- State Auditor prepares a fiscal note; AG reviews under § 116.175.4 RSMo.
- Secretary of State drafts a summary statement; AG reviews under § 116.334 RSMo.
- Petition certified for circulation.
When the AG rejects at step 2, the pipeline stops there unless the Secretary of State overrides under § 116.332.4 or the proponent refiles a corrected version.
Citations and references
Statutes: § 116.332 RSMo; § 116.332.4 RSMo (Secretary of State final decision); § 116.050 RSMo (the bracketing/underlining requirement that this petition failed).
Companion form-review opinions on Apple's other 2019 petitions: 117-2019 (2020-093, local min wage); 119-2019 (2020-096, public health co-op); 120-2019 (2020-099, public campaign finance / income-tax). 143-2019 also rejected a different proponent's Article VIII petition for form.
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/118-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=2
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain, the linked PDF is authoritative.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ERIC SCHMITT
July 3, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 118-2019
The Honorable John R. Ashcroft
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Secretary Ashcroft:
This opinion letter responds to your request dated June 27, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition submitted by Winston Apple (2020-094).
We conclude that the petition must be rejected for at least the following reason:
The petition does not contain "all matter which is to be deleted included in its proper place enclosed in brackets and all new matter shown underlined" as required pursuant to § 116.050, RSMo.
Because of our rejection of the form of the petition for the reasons stated above, we have not reviewed the petition to determine whether additional deficiencies exist. Pursuant to § 116.332.4, RSMo, the Secretary of State is authorized to review this opinion and "make a final decision as to the approval or rejection of the form of the petition."
Very truly yours,
ERIC S. SCHMITT
Attorney General
Supreme Court Building
207 W. High Street
P.O. Box 899
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Phone: (573) 751-3321
Fax: (573) 751-0774
www.ago.mo.gov
OP-2019-0143