The fate of an abortion rights amendment is now in the hands of the Missouri Supreme Court — and it has just a few days to reach a decision.
Missouri’s high court will have to issue a ruling by Tuesday, the final day that a measure can be removed from the Nov. 5 ballot.
How the court rules could be decisive for an effort to undo the state’s near total ban on abortion in November and affect voter turnout on Election Day. The decision could also ultimately reshape how constitutional amendments are presented to Missouri voters in future elections.
Late Friday evening, Cole County Judge Christopher Limbaugh ruled that the full text of the ballot measure, known as Amendment 3, failed to meet state requirements by not naming sections of existing law or the constitution that would be repealed if voters pass the measure.
Advertisement
Proponents of Amendment 3 filed an appeal Saturday to the Missouri Court of Appeals’ Western District, which transferred the case to the state Supreme Court.
Mary Catherine Martin, an attorney representing four plaintiffs seeking to remove Amendment 3 from the ballot, said she was grateful Limbaugh rendered a quick decision after he held a hearing on the case on Friday morning. She had argued that backers of the amendment obscured the ability of petition signers to gauge the impact of its potential passage by omitting from the petition mention of laws the amendment would repeal.
“The disclaimer needed to be within the full text of the measure attached to the petitions that were circulated,” Martin said. “So the error is not in the law’s text. And the error is not with the text on the ballot. The error that he found was in the circulated petitions.”
Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes CEO Emily Wales said Saturday afternoon that Limbaugh’s decision is merely a “distraction.”
“We’re going to be on the ballot,” Wales said. “But it is incredibly frustrating to have a last ditch effort to throw so much chaos into this process.”
Advertisement
Brian Munoz
/
St. Louis Public Radio
The Missouri Supreme Court in Jefferson City.
Precedent setting?
Limbaugh’s opinion cited a 2018 ethics and redistricting measure known as Clean Missouri that had a disclaimer at the top of the petition stating that its passage could result in the repeal of a number of statutes.
Advertisement
“The drafters of prior amendments had no reason other than compliance with [state law and the Missouri Constitution] to inform potential signers of the enormously broad impacts, both direct and implied, of their proposed measures,” Limbaugh wrote. “Their inclusion of long lists of affected laws was mandatory in order to protect potential signatories.”
But a number of other constitutional amendments placed before voters didn’t have similar disclaimers as the Clean Missouri measure. For instance, the 2022 initiative that legalized marijuana for adult use didn’t say at the top of the petition that the measure would repeal state laws inflicting penalties for possession or purchase of cannabis products. And another initiative on the November 2024 ballot that would legalize sports betting in Missouri also didn’t mention any state statutes that could be repealed.
Wales, of Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes, said doing what Limbaugh would have asked is “functionally impossible.”
“We can’t predict every existing or potential future statute that would conflict with a constitutional change,” Wales said. “The way that this works is the voters get to understand what they’re voting on, what established right they would be adding to the Constitution. And then the courts go through and say: ‘Here’s where the conflicts are.’”
Wales also said if Limbaugh’s ruling is upheld, it would make the initiative petition process “a right in name only.” Requiring petition organizers to “predict and identify every tiny conflict” with state law or the constitution would make the process too difficult, she said.
Advertisement
Martin, the attorney who argued to remove Amendment 3 from the ballot, said whether other constitutional amendments had the appropriate disclaimers is not relevant to this case. “They could very well have broken the law and gotten away with it,” she said.
High stakes
The looming Missouri Supreme Court decision could be a major turning point for the fight for legal abortion in Missouri.
Polling from St. Louis University and YouGov in August found that 52% of poll respondents supported Amendment 3. And that was before the campaign supporting the amendment launched its advertising campaign.
While Republican elected officials have promised to organize an opposition campaign to the initiative, they will almost certainly be outspent. Since the middle of August, the campaign committee backing the passage of Amendment 3 received more than $8 million in donations of $5,000 or more.
By comparison, a group recently formed to oppose Amendment 3 raised about $80,000 in donations of $5,000 or more throughout the entirety of 2024. And a committee that Missouri Right to Life organized raised about $545,000 in large donations since April.
Advertisement
Even some Republicans who oppose Amendment 3 have publicly conceded that it may be an uphill battle to defeat the initiatives at the polls. That includes state Sen. Jason Bean, who represents a Senate district that voted for Republican Donald Trump in 2020 by landslide margins.
“Everything that I’m kind of hearing and seeing, unfortunately, yes, I think it’s going to pass,” said Bean, R-Dunklin County, on a recent episode of Politically Speaking.
Missouri Democrats are banking on the abortion initiative boosting turnout for their candidates — particularly legislative contenders in suburban districts. The SLU/YouGov poll showed that abortion initiative provided limited coattails for statewide Democratic contenders.
Other GOP elected officials, including gubernatorial nominee Mike Kehoe, have said they believe abortion rights opponents can defeat Amendment 3. Back in 2006, an underfunded, but well-organized, group of social conservatives almost defeated a measure enshrining protection for embryonic stem cell research despite being heavily outspent.
“I believe the people who are interested in protecting innocent life will show up as well, and we will do everything we can to make sure Missourians understand how important it is to protect innocent life and come out and defeat that amendment,” Kehoe said last month on the Politically Speaking Hour on St. Louis on the Air.
Advertisement
Martin’s lawsuit against Amendment 3 also contended that the measure violated a prohibition against an amendment having more than one subject. Limbaugh didn’t rule on that point.
Send questions and comments about this story to feedback@stlpublicradio.org.
Copyright 2023 St. Louis Public Radio. To see more, visit St. Louis Public Radio.
Jason Rosenbaum Jason is the politics correspondent for St. Louis Public Radio. See stories by Jason Rosenbaum
Missouri senior forward Mark Mitchell was recognized Monday with a second-team selection to the All-Southeastern Conference teams.
Mitchell has led the Tigers all season long and tops the team in scoring (17.9 points per game), rebounding (5.2) and assists (3.6). He would be the just the second player in program to lead all the categories in one season, joining Albert White from the 1998-99 season.
Mitchell is also on pace to become the first player in program history to average at least 17 points, five rebounds and three assists since Anthony Peeler in 1992, the year he took home the Big 8 Conference Player of the Year award.
Mitchell was the only Missouri player to be recognized in SEC postseason awards.
Advertisement
Five players were named to each of the three All-SEC teams.
Darius Acuff Jr. (Arkansas), Ja’Kobi Gillespie (Tennessee), Thomas Haugh (Florida), Labaron Philon Jr. (Alabama) and Tyler Tanner (Vanderbilt) made the first team.
Acuff was named the conference’s player of the year and freshman of the year.
Joining Mitchell on the second team were Nate Ament (Tennessee), Rueben Chinyelu (Florida), Otega Oweh (Kentucky) and Dailyn Swain (Texas), while Rashaun Agee (Texas A&M), Alex Condon (Florida), Keyshawn Hall (Auburn), Aden Holloway (Alabama) and Josh Hubbard (Mississippi State) were named to the third team.
The All-SEC defensive team consisted of Chinyelu, Somto Cyril (Georgia), Felix Okpara (Tennessee), Billy Richmond III (Arkansas) and Tanner. Chinyelu was selected as the defensive player of the year.
Advertisement
Appearing on the all-freshman team were Acuff, Amari Allen (Alabama), Ament, Malachi Moreno (Kentucky) and Meleek Thomas (Arkansas).
Swain was selected as the newcomer of the year, while Urban Klavzar of Florida was named the sixth man of the year.
The 2026 Missouri high school basketball state championship brackets continue on Monday, March 9, with eight games in the sectional and quarterfinal round of the higher classifications.
High School On SI has brackets for every classification in the Missouri high school basketball playoffs. The championship games will begin on March 19.
Missouri High School Girls Basketball 2026 Playoff Brackets, Schedule (MSHSAA) – March 9, 2026
Advertisement
Sectionals
Doniphan vs. Potosi – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
St. James vs. St. Francis Borgia – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Notre Dame de Sion vs. Oak Grove – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Smithville vs. Benton – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Cardinal Ritter College Prep vs. Clayton – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
Orchard Farm vs. Kirksville – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
Boonville vs. Strafford – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Reeds Spring vs. Nevada – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
Quarterfinals
Festus vs. Lift for Life Academy – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Grandview vs. Kearney – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
MICDS vs. St. Dominic – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
Helias vs. Marshfield – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
Quarterfinals
Jackson vs. Marquette – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Advertisement
Rock Bridge vs. Staley – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Incarnate Word Academy vs. Troy-Buchanan – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Kickapoo vs. Lee’s Summit West – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT
Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe’s request to grade public schools on an “A” through “F” scale is pushing House lawmakers to approve legislation some think isn’t quite ready.
With approval and dissent on both sides of the aisle, the House voted a bill to create a new school accountability system through to the Senate 96-53 Thursday despite concerns the letter grades could be a “scarlet letter” for underperforming schools.
“Will this labeling system actually improve schools or will it mostly brand communities, destabilize staffing and incentivize gaming rather than learning?” asked state Rep. Kem Smith, a Democrat from Florissant, during House debate Tuesday morning, March 3.
Advertisement
She said the key metrics that determine the grade, performance and growth, are volatile.
“The label itself can become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” she said. “The bill doubles down on high stakes metrics that are known to be unstable.”
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Dane Diehl, a Republican from Butler, told lawmakers that a performance-based school report card with “A” through “F” grades is inevitable. The details, though, are negotiable.
“The governor’s executive order, it is going to happen either way,” he said. “I think we tried to make that process a little better for school districts.”
Advertisement
Kehoe’s order directs the state’s education department to draw up a plan for the report cards and present it to the State Board of Education. The board could reject the idea, but with a board with primarily new members appointed by Kehoe, lawmakers have accepted the system as fate.
State Rep. Ed Lewis, a Republican from Moberly and chair of the House’s education committee, told the committee in January that he prioritized the bill as a way to give lawmakers influence over the final outcome. He is happy with the edits the committee made, which gives the education department more leeway to determine grade thresholds and removes a provision that would raise expectations once 65% of schools achieve “A” or “B” grades.
The House also approved an amendment March 3 that would grade schools’ environment. This would be based on the rates of student suspension, seclusion and restraint incident rates and satisfaction surveys given to students, parents and teachers.
The Senate’s version, which passed out of its education committee last week, does not include those changes.
“I think (the House bill) is the best product we have in the Capitol right now,” Lewis said. “I am not saying it’s complete, but it is the best we have right now.”
Advertisement
The changes have softened some skeptics of the legislation, like state Rep. Brad Pollitt.
Pollitt, a Sedalia Republican, said he didn’t support the legislation “for a number of years.” But with the edits, he sees potential for the legislation to usher in changes to the way the state accredits public schools.
The current process, he said, “nobody seems to like,” pointing to widespread concerns with the state’s standardized test.
Some of these changes are already happening quietly. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education received a grant from the federal government to develop a state assessment based on through-year testing, which would measure student growth throughout the school year, instead of a single summative assessment.
The department is poised to pilot the new test in 14 classrooms this spring, hoping to eventually offer it statewide within a few years. But the estimated startup cost of $2 million is one of many department requests cut from the governor’s proposed budget as the state grapples with declining revenue.
Advertisement
Creating the “A” through “F” report cards is estimated to cost a similar amount, if not more, according to the state’s fiscal note. The expense is largely frontloaded, going to the programming and technology support required to create the grade cards’ interface.
When The Independent asked Kehoe’s office about the fiscal note, the governor’s communications director Gabby Picard said he would work with “associated agencies” to determine appropriate funding “while remaining mindful of the current budget constraints and maintaining fiscal responsibility.”
The House’s version of the legislation includes an incentive program for high-performing schools, giving bonuses to go toward teacher recruitment and retention, if the legislature appropriates funding for the program.
More: Missouri school board considers using letter grades to score districts
The bill originally proposed incentives of $50-100 per student to subsidize teacher pay. This had large fiscal implications, and Lewis surmised that it would violate a section of the State Constitution prohibiting bonuses for public employees.
Advertisement
Making the funding optional and directing it to the school’s teacher recruitment and retention fund remedied those concerns. The Senate Education Committee removed the incentive program in its version of the legislation.
The House’s approval Thursday does not stop discussion and possible amendments. Next, the bill will go to the Senate for consideration, and if any changes are made, it will return to the House for more discussion.
This story was first published at missouriindependent.com.
