Did the Missouri AG approve the form of Mary Anne Sedey's 2019 initiative petition (version 12) to amend Article VIII of the Missouri Constitution?

Plain-English summary

Mary Anne Sedey filed Version 12 of her Article VIII initiative petition (file 2020-083) alongside Version 11 (file 2020-082, addressed in Opinion 105-2019). Article VIII is the elections article of the Missouri Constitution. Under § 116.332 RSMo, the Attorney General checks each filed initiative petition for "sufficiency as to form" within 10 days of referral by the Secretary of State.

The AG approved this one. The approval is purely procedural: the petition meets the form requirements for an initiative petition under Chapter 116 RSMo. The AG's letter says nothing about whether the proposal is sound, constitutional, or wise. Section 116.332 also makes the Secretary of State the final decisionmaker on form, so even AG approval does not bind that office.

This is the companion opinion to 105-2019. Proponents file parallel versions to hedge against drafting and litigation risk. If both forms are approved, only one will typically be circulated for signatures; the other operates as a backup.

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: How is Version 12 different from Version 11?
A: The AG opinions for Versions 11 and 12 are functionally identical because form review does not turn on substantive differences. The substantive variation between the two versions is internal to the petition's draft language and is not described in either AG opinion. Variants typically test different policy parameters (for example, definitions of "voter," registration windows, or felony-disenfranchisement carveouts).

Q: Does AG approval of two versions mean both can appear on the ballot?
A: No. AG approval is just one of several gates. Only the version that gathers enough valid signatures by the statutory deadline goes to voters. Even then, the Secretary of State can reject a petition for any other form defect, and pre-circulation challenges can derail either or both.

Q: What does the AG mean by "no view respecting the adequacy or inadequacy of the petition generally"?
A: Statutory boilerplate. Section 116.332 makes form review narrow and procedural; the AG must disclaim any substantive endorsement so the letter cannot later be cited as approval of the proposal's merits.

Q: Why do proponents file multiple versions?
A: Three main reasons. First, to test different drafting choices for survivability against form rejection. Second, to give the courts something to compare in pre-circulation challenges. Third, to keep flexibility on which exact text to circulate once the AG-approved summary language is finalized.

Q: When does the petition need signatures by?
A: For a Missouri constitutional initiative aimed at the next general-election ballot, signatures must be filed with the Secretary of State no later than six months before the election. The exact deadline varies; this opinion does not address timing.

Background and statutory framework

The initiative pipeline under Chapter 116 RSMo runs through these steps in order:

1. Proponent files the petition with the Secretary of State.
2. AG reviews sufficiency as to form under § 116.332 RSMo (this opinion).
3. State Auditor prepares a fiscal note and fiscal-note summary; AG reviews legal content and form under § 116.175 RSMo.
4. Secretary of State drafts the official ballot summary statement; AG reviews legal content and form under § 116.334 RSMo.
5. Petition is certified for circulation; signatures gathered by deadline.

Under § 116.332 the Secretary of State retains final authority on form. The AG's job is the first technical filter; the Secretary, fiscal-note pipeline, and courts handle everything else.

Citations and references

Statutes: § 116.332, RSMo (the operative provision).

Constitutional provisions referenced: Mo. Const. art. VIII (elections, the subject of the proposed amendment); Mo. Const. art. III, § 50 (initiative threshold).

Sister Sedey Article VIII opinion: 105-2019 (Version 11, 2020-082).

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/106-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI

ERIC SCHMITT

June 27, 2019

OPINION LETTER NO. 106-2019

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 June 17, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition to amend Article VIII of the Missouri Constitution submitted by Mary Anne Sedey, Version 12 (2020-083).

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.

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-2019-0123