Does your state lean blue or lean red? Check out our new report, highlighting partisan control of state government from 1992-2013.
Missouri Judicial Appointment Amendment, Amendment 3 (2012)
| Judicial Appointment Amendment | |
 | |
| Quick stats | |
| Type: | Constitutional amendment |
| Constitution: | Missouri Constitution |
| Referred by: | Missouri State Legislature |
| Topic: | State judiciary |
| Status: |  |
Contents |
Election results
- See also: 2012 ballot measure election results
The following are official election results
| Missouri Amendment 3 (2012) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| No | 1,929,470 | 76% | ||
| Yes | 608,458 | 24% | ||
Results via Missouri Secretary of State
Ballot text
The ballot summary of the measure, according to the Missouri Secretary of State:[2]
| “ | Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to change the current nonpartisan selection of supreme court and court of appeals judges to a process that gives the governor increased authority to: appoint a majority of the commission that selects these court nominees; and appoint all lawyers to the commission by removing the requirement that the governor's appointees be nonlawyers? | ” |
Support
No formal campaign in favor of the measure was identified by Ballotpedia.
Opposition
No formal campaign in opposition of the measure was identified by Ballotpedia.
Lawsuit
Legislator lawsuit
The ballot summary of the measure was under scrutiny, with legislative figures who support the measure stating that the summary, provided by the Missouri Secretary of State, was misleading to voters. A subsequent lawsuit was filed with Cole County Circuit Court.[2]
State Senator Jim Lembke, who sponsored the measure, stated about the Missouri Secretary of State's measure summary, "She misuses her power to manipulate the process, and I believe that this is more evidence that she's been a dishonest broker of partisan politics."
However, Secretary of State spokesman Ryan Hobart stated about controversies surrounding 2012 ballot measure summaries, "This office has always followed our legal obligation to provide Missourians with fair and sufficient summaries of ballot initiatives, and this summary is no different".[2]
The court ruled in favor of the secretary's office, stating, "We are pleased with the Cole County Circuit Court’s decision today regarding Constitutional Amendment 3 (SJR 51). The secretary of state's office has a legal obligation to provide Missourians with fair and sufficient summaries of ballot measures. The judge’s decision supports our position that the summary drafted by our office meets that legal standard."[3]
Path to the ballot
In order to qualify for the ballot, the measure required approval by a majority of the members of each chamber of the Missouri General Assembly.
The House approved the measure 84-71 on May 10, 2012, thus sending it to the ballot.[1]
See also
External links
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 stltoday "Mo. voters to decide on revising system for appointing judges," May 11, 2012
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Columbia Missourian, "Lawmakers don't like summary of Missouri ballot issues", July 4, 2012
- ↑ Missouri Secretary of State, "Office of the Missouri Secretary of State Statement Regarding Constitutional Amendment 3 (SJR 51)", September 10, 2012
 |
State of Missouri Jefferson City (capital) |
|---|---|
| Ballot Measures |
List of Missouri ballot measures | Local measures | School bond issues | Ballot measure laws | Initiative laws | History of I&R | Campaign Finance Requirements | Recall process | |
| Government |
Missouri State Constitution | House of Representatives | Senate | Joint Committee on Legislative Research | Ethics Commission | |
| State executive officers |
Governor | Lieutenant Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | State Auditor | Commissioner of Education | Director of Insurance | Director of Agriculture | Director of Natural Resources | Director of Labor & Industrial Relations | Chairman of Public Service Commission | |
| Judiciary |
Missouri Supreme Court | County circuit judges | District Courts | Judicial Nominating Commission | Judicial news | Judicial activist organizations | |
| Transparency Topics |
Sunshine Law | Transparency Checklist | Government corruption reports | Transparency Legislation | Open Records procedures | Transparency Advocates | Transparency blogs | State budget | Taxpayer-funded lobbying associations | |
| Divisions |
State |
List of Counties |
List of Cities |
List of School Districts | |
