Did Missouri approve ballot wording allowing citizens to challenge misleading titles and protecting prior initiatives?

Plain-English summary

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey approved the legal content and form of the proposed summary statement for Jamie Howard's initiative petition 2026-060. The statement described barring legislative repeal or amendment of citizen-enacted laws or amendments, including prior measures, unless 80% of legislators referred the changes to voters.

It also described prohibiting legislatively referred amendments from limiting initiative or referendum powers, permitting citizen challenges to misleading ballot titles and requiring courts to rewrite them, general-election placement for most measures unless 80% of legislators and the governor approved a special election, and preservation of current vote and signature requirements. The opinion did not endorse the petition.

What this means for you

Missouri voters and initiative proponents

The reviewed statement expressly included prior citizen-enacted measures and described preserving current majority-vote and signature requirements.

State legislators and election officials

The statement described an 80% legislative referral threshold and general-election placement for most measures unless the stated special-election threshold was met.

Courts, citizens, and election lawyers

The statement described citizen challenges to misleading ballot titles and court rewriting to make the titles completely unbiased, clear, accurate, and readable.

Common questions

Q: Did the statement include prior measures?
A: Yes. It expressly included prior citizen-enacted laws or amendments.

Q: Could citizens challenge ballot titles?
A: Yes. The statement described citizen challenges and required courts to rewrite misleading titles.

Q: What threshold did it identify for legislative changes?
A: Eighty percent of legislators to refer changes to voters.

Q: What petition rules would remain?
A: Current majority-vote and signature requirements for citizen petitions.

Background and statutory framework

The Missouri Secretary of State requested review on July 2, 2025. The attorney general reviewed the proposed summary statement under § 116.334, RSMo and approved it on July 11, 2025.

The proposal was identified as Jamie Howard's petition 2026-060. The opinion reproduced the statement's five provisions concerning citizen measures, legislative thresholds, elections, ballot titles, and petition requirements.

Citations and references

Statute: § 116.334, RSMo.

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/121-2025.pdf

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ANDREW BAILEY

July 11, 2025

OPINION LETTER NO. 121-2025

The Honorable Denny Hoskins
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear Secretary Hoskins:

This opinion letter responds to your request dated July 2, 2025 for our review under § 116.334, RSMo of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Jamie Howard, 2026-060. The proposed summary statement is as follows:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:

• Bar the legislature from repealing or amending citizen-enacted laws or amendments unless 80% of legislators refer changes to voters, including prior measures;

• Prohibit legislatively referred amendments from limiting the initiative or referendum powers;

• Permit citizens to challenge misleading ballot titles and require courts to rewrite them to be completely unbiased, clear, accurate, and readable;

• Require most ballot measures to be held at general elections unless approved for special elections by 80% of legislators and the governor; and

• Preserve current majority vote and signature requirements for citizen petitions?

Pursuant to § 116.334, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the proposed statement. Because our review of the statement is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition, nor as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents.

Very truly yours,

ANDREW BAILEY
Attorney General

OP-2025-133

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