Did Missouri's AG approve the form of Damien Johnson's initiative petition to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution (Petition 2020-030)?

Plain-English summary

Note: the AG's filing subject line for this opinion says "rejection," but the letter body says "We approve the petition as to form." The body governs. This is an approval.

Damien Johnson submitted Petition 2020-030 proposing to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution (the article governing the legislative branch). The AG approved the form under § 116.332, RSMo. The standard reservations attach:

1. Final authority is the Secretary's. The AG's approval does not preclude the Secretary of State from rejecting the petition.
2. Form approval is not substance approval. The AG takes no position on the merits.

Damien Johnson filed more than one Article III petition in early 2019; Petition 2020-032 was approved as to form in opinion 14-2019. The opinion does not describe what specific change to Article III the petition proposed.

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. Whether Petition 2020-030 was actually circulated and qualified for the ballot is a separate question that the Missouri Secretary of State's records would show.

Common questions

Why does the subject line say "rejection" if the body says approval?

A clerical inconsistency in the AG office's filing system. The letter body is the authoritative document. See companion opinion 14-2019 for the same kind of mismatch with another Johnson petition.

What is Article III about?

The article on the Missouri General Assembly: structure, qualifications, terms, sessions, procedures, and limits on legislative power.

What does AG form approval mean again?

That the document's structure complies with Chapter 116, RSMo. It is not a substantive endorsement.

Where does the actual substance of the petition appear?

In the petition filed with the Secretary of State's office, under petition number 2020-030. The form-review opinion does not summarize it.

Background and statutory framework

The statute the AG cites in this letter is § 116.332, RSMo, which directs the AG to review a submitted petition for form on the Secretary of State's request and reserves the final decision on form to the Secretary. The broader initiative process (summary statement, fiscal note, signature gathering) runs through other sections of Chapter 116, but this letter addresses only the form question under § 116.332.

Approval at this stage opens the door to those next steps, but each is its own gate.

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/12-2019.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain. The linked PDF is authoritative.

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

January 10, 2019

OPINION LETTER NO. 12-2019

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 2, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution submitted by Damien Johnson, (2020-030).

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.

Very truly yours,
ERIC S. SCHMITT
Attorney General

OP-2019-0002