MO Opinion No. 166-2019 2019-08-05

Did the Missouri AG approve the form of Winston Apple's 2019 Article III initiative petition on protecting voter-approved statutes from legislative repeal (file 2020-103)?

Short answer: Yes, as to form. AG Schmitt approved the legal form of Apple's Article III petition 2020-103 to amend the Missouri Constitution. The petition would have prohibited the General Assembly from altering, amending, or repealing a voter-approved initiative statute unless the change is sent back to the voters. Form approval under § 116.332 RSMo is procedural; the Secretary of State retains final authority. The fiscal-note review (179-2019) and summary-statement review (182-2019) followed in August.

Disclaimer: This is an official Missouri Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed Missouri attorney for advice on your specific situation.

Plain-English summary

Winston Apple filed three parallel initiative petitions in August 2019 (numbered 2020-101, 2020-102, 2020-103) addressing different election-system reforms. Petition 2020-103, the subject of this opinion, would have amended Article III of the Missouri Constitution to bar the General Assembly from altering, amending, or repealing a voter-approved initiative statute unless the legislature submits the proposed change back to the voters and a majority approves it.

Under § 116.332 RSMo, the Secretary of State sends each filed petition to the AG for a "sufficiency as to form" review. AG Schmitt's letter here approves the form of petition 2020-103. Form approval is structural; it does not endorse the policy and it does not bind the Secretary of State, who retains final approval authority.

This is the form-review step that came before the fiscal-note review (179-2019, August 28) and the summary-statement review (182-2019, August 30) for the same petition.

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 "initiative protection"?
A: A constitutional rule that voter-approved statutes cannot be repealed or substantively changed by the legislature acting alone. Several states with strong initiative traditions, including California, have variants. The Apple petition would have written it into the Missouri Constitution under Article III (legislative branch).

Q: Why Article III?
A: Article III governs the legislative power. The petition's restriction is a limit on what the General Assembly can do, so the constitutional drafters located it there.

Q: Who has final authority on form?
A: The Secretary of State, John R. Ashcroft at the time. § 116.332 expressly reserves "final authority to approve or reject" to him.

Q: How does this connect to the other Apple August 2019 petitions?
A: All three Apple petitions are election-system reforms but target different mechanisms. Petition 2020-101 changes how votes are tallied (ranked-choice voting). Petition 2020-102 changes how legislative seats are allocated (party-list proportional representation). Petition 2020-103 (this one) changes how voter-passed statutes interact with the legislature.

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.

Citations and references

Statutes: § 116.332 RSMo (the operative provision); § 116.175 RSMo (fiscal-note pipeline); § 116.334 RSMo (summary-statement pipeline); § 116.050 RSMo (drafting requirements).

Companion opinions on the same petition (2020-103): 179-2019 (fiscal note review), 182-2019 (summary statement review).

Sister Apple August 2019 petitions: 177-2019 / 180-2019 (2020-101, ranked-choice voting); 178-2019 / 181-2019 (2020-102, proportional representation).

Source

Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/166-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ERIC SCHMITT
August 5, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 166-2019
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 July 26, 2019,
for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of
an initiative petition to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution
submitted by Winston Apple (2020-103).
We approve the petition as to form, but § 116.332 gives the Secretary of
State final authority to approve or reject the petition. Therefore, our approval
of the form of the petition does not preclude you from rejecting the petition.
Because our review of the petition is simply for the purpose of
determining sufficiency as to form, the fact that we do not reject the petition
is not to be construed as a determination that the petition is sufficient as to
substance. Likewise, because our review is mandated by statute, no action
that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an
endorsement of the petition or of the objectives of its proponents, or the expression
of any view respecting the adequacy or inadequacy of the petition generally.
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-2019-0191