Did the Missouri AG approve the ballot summary for Patricia Thomas's Article V petition 2020-023 making appellate judges run in partisan elections?

Plain-English summary

Patricia Thomas's initiative petition 2020-023 was an effort to roll back Missouri's Nonpartisan Court Plan (the Missouri Plan), the appellate-judicial-selection system used in Missouri since 1940 and copied by many other states. The petition would have amended Article V of the Missouri Constitution to make appellate judges (Missouri Supreme Court and Court of Appeals) run in partisan elections, cut their terms from 12 years to 6 years, capped retention at two consecutive terms per seat, eliminated the appellate judicial commission's role in filling vacancies, and removed restrictions on judicial campaign contributions.

This 2019 opinion is the AG's § 116.334 approval of the Secretary of State's summary statement for that petition. The statement uses a bullet list to lay out the five elements of the proposed amendment. The companion version-2 petition (with nonpartisan-but-endorsed elections instead of partisan) is at Op. Mo. Att'y Gen. 41-2019.

The AG approved the form of the summary statement and added the standard § 116.334 disclaimer that approval is not an endorsement of the petition or its objectives.

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

What is the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan?

The "Missouri Plan" is a judicial selection system that combines merit selection with retention elections. An appellate judicial commission screens candidates and sends three nominees to the Governor for each vacancy; the Governor appoints from those three. Once seated, the judge serves a fixed term and then faces an up-or-down retention vote at the next general election. The Missouri Plan was adopted in 1940 (Article V, § 25 of the Missouri Constitution) and has been widely copied in other states.

What would Thomas's 2020-023 petition actually change?

Five things, all undoing Missouri Plan features for appellate courts: (1) partisan elections (so Republicans and Democrats would have nominees on the ballot); (2) shorter terms (6 years instead of 12); (3) two-term limit; (4) gubernatorial vacancy appointments without input from the appellate judicial commission; (5) no campaign-contribution restrictions on judicial candidates.

What is the version-2 difference?

Op. 41-2019 (petition 2020-024, "version 2") replaces partisan elections with "nonpartisan elections" where candidates can still declare party support and accept party endorsements. So the version-2 candidate looks formally nonpartisan but functionally partisan. The other four elements are the same.

Did this petition reach the ballot?

Form approval and summary review are administrative-clearance steps. Reaching the ballot depends on signature collection, deadlines, and any litigation challenges. The AG's role ends at the § 116.334 form review.

Does the AG take a position on partisan vs. nonpartisan judicial elections?

No. The opinion explicitly disclaims any endorsement of the petition or its objectives. The AG's review is strictly procedural: whether the summary statement accurately presents the petition in the legally required form.

Background and statutory framework

Missouri's initiative process runs through Chapter 116. § 116.334 governs AG review of summary statements. The substantive proposal targets Mo. Const. art. V (Judicial Department), specifically the appellate-judicial-selection mechanism in § 25 (Nonpartisan Court Plan). The companion version-2 petition is at Op. Mo. Att'y Gen. 41-2019.

Citations

• § 116.334, RSMo (AG review of summary statement)
• Mo. Const. art. V (Judicial Department)
• Mo. Const. art. V, § 25 (Nonpartisan Court Plan, 1940)
• Mo. Const. art. III, §§ 49 to 53 (initiative and referendum process)
• Initiative Petition 2020-023 (Thomas, Article V partisan elections)
• Op. Mo. Att'y Gen. 41-2019 (Thomas 2020-024 "version 2," nonpartisan-with-endorsement variant)

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/40-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ERIC SCHMITT
JEFFERSON CITY
P.O. Box 899
ATTORNEY GENERAL
65102
(573) 751-3321

February 7, 2019

OPINION LETTER NO. 40-2019

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 January 28, 2019, for our review under § 116.334, RSMo, of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Patricia Thomas regarding a proposed constitutional amendment to amend Article V of the Missouri Constitution, version 1 (2020-023). The proposed summary statement is as follows:

Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to provide that:

• appellate court (supreme court and court of appeals) judges shall be elected in partisan elections;
• the term of an appellate court judge shall be reduced from 12 years to 6 years;
• no appellate court judge can be elected to a particular judicial seat for more than two consecutive terms;
• the governor fills appellate court vacancies without recommendations from the appellate judicial commission; and
• all judicial candidates can receive and make campaign contributions?

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,

ERIC S. SCHMITT
Attorney General

OP-2019-0030