A Cole County Circuit judge said he will rule no later than Wednesday on a case that will determine if a proposed amendment to the Missouri Constitution on ballot initiatives will be on the November ballot.
Judge Daniel Green heard arguments Tuesday over the constitutionality of the proposed amendment, which would make it harder to overturn voter-approved initiatives like changes to state statute and the constitution.
Less than two years ago, Missouri lawmakers passed a law nullifying a paid sick leave statute that voters had approved with 57% of a statewide vote.
Under the proposed amendment, the legislature would be unable to change anything passed in a voter-approved initiative without an 80% majority in both chambers.
If that scenario occurs, the change would then go to a vote of the people.
Secretary of State Denny Hoskins denied placing the amendment on the ballot earlier this month, saying the proposal violates the single-subject clause of the state's constitution.
He also said the amendment entrenched "itself and other constitutional amendments from being reconsidered in future constitutional amendments."
Respect Missouri Voters, the group behind the amendment, sued to reverse Hoskins' decision.
In May, the group said it turned in more than 350,000 signatures in favor of the proposed amendment.
The group's attorney, Chuck Hatfield, said the proposal does not contain too many subjects.
"I don't think there's any colorable argument that this measure is not a single subject within the way our courts have interpreted," Hatfield said.
Additionally, the lawsuit challenges Hoskins' attempt to vacate the previous ballot summary that he approved.
"I'm not sure where it comes from. I look forward to hearing the secretary's position on where they get the authority to vacate a ballot title that has already been submitted, written by the Secretary of State himself," Hatfield said.
Speaking for Hoskins, attorney Kathleen Hunker said the proposed amendment is deceptive and does violate the state's constitution.
"The initiative fuses disparate topics together, ranging from ballot title reform to the reorganization of powers, to the alterations of executive powers, to the overhaul of the amendment process," Hunker said.
Hunker also said it is well within the secretary of state's powers to review the constitutionality of a proposed amendment after the signature-gathering process.
"The secretary's first opportunity to review single subject as well as constitutional compliance … would have been the post-circulation (petition) review, which is what is at issue," Hunker said.
In response to comments made by Hatfield on how Hoskins' actions are unprecedented, Hunker said so is this amendment.
"The initiative itself is unprecedented and therefore led to unprecedented action being taken because it never had reached that point," Hunker said.
After the hearing, Hatfield said most ideas proposed through the initiative petition process are unprecedented.
"Riverboat gambling was a radical idea in the '90s. Sports betting, marijuana, these are all new ideas about how we're going to set up the government. That's why people have to do them because they're not being advanced through the legislature," Hatfield said.
Whatever decision Green reaches, it will likely be appealed to the Western District Court of Appeals and then to the Missouri Supreme Court.
The case must be resolved by Sept 8. That is the deadline for court-ordered additions to appear on the November ballot.
Copyright 2026 St. Louis Public Radio
