Why did Missouri reject Damien Johnson's initiative petition 2026-027?

Plain-English summary

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey rejected Damien Johnson's Article I initiative petition, identified as 2026-027, because the text of the proposed measure did not include a section number. The opinion quoted Section 116.050.2, RSMo, which requires the full and correct text of an initiative measure and specifies how deleted and new matter must be shown.

The attorney general did not review the petition for additional deficiencies after identifying that defect. Under § 116.332.4, RSMo, the secretary of state retained authority to make the final decision on approval or rejection of the petition's form.

What this means for you

Initiative petition proponents

Opinion 40-2025 treated the absence of a section number in the proposed measure as a ground for rejecting petition 2026-027 at the form-review stage.

Missouri election officials

The opinion identified one form defect and stopped without deciding whether other deficiencies existed. It also recognized the secretary of state's final decision authority under § 116.332.4, RSMo.

Election lawyers and ballot-measure researchers

The opinion is limited to petition drafting form. It did not address the proposal's substantive validity or identify every possible form problem.

Common questions

Q: Why was petition 2026-027 rejected?
A: The text of the proposed measure did not include a section number.

Q: Did the attorney general identify every defect in the petition?
A: No. The opinion said it did not review for additional deficiencies after rejecting the petition for the stated reason.

Q: Who had final authority over the petition's form?
A: The opinion said § 116.332.4, RSMo authorized the secretary of state to make the final approval or rejection decision.

Background and statutory framework

The Missouri Secretary of State requested review on February 18, 2025. Damien Johnson submitted an Article I petition identified as 2026-027.

The attorney general issued the rejection on March 3, 2025. The opinion relied on Section 116.050.2, RSMo and cited § 116.332.4, RSMo for the secretary of state's final decision authority.

Citations and references

Statutes: Section 116.050.2, RSMo; § 116.332.4, RSMo.

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/40-2025.pdf

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ANDREW BAILEY

March 3, 2025

OPINION LETTER NO. 40-2025

The Honorable Denny Hoskins
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear Secretary Hoskins:

This opinion letter responds to your request dated February 18, 2025, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition submitted by Damien Johnson, Article I, 2026-027.

We conclude that the petition must be rejected for at least the following reasons:

Section 116.050.2, RSMo states that “The full and correct text of all initiative and referendum petition measures shall: (1) Contain all matter which is to be deleted included in its proper place enclosed in brackets and all new matter shown underlined;” This petition does not include, as part of the text of the proposed measure, a section number.

Because of our rejection of the form of the petition for the reasons stated above, we have not reviewed the petition to determine whether additional deficiencies exist. Pursuant to § 116.332.4, RSMo, the Secretary of State is authorized to review this opinion and “make a final decision as to the approval or rejection of the form of the petition.”

Very truly yours,

ANDREW BAILEY
Attorney General

OP-2025-040

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