Did MO AG inflate cost estimate for abortion rights proposal? High court hears arguments
.jpg "Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey gives his first remarks after being sworn into office in January at the Missouri Supreme Court in Jefferson City.")
An attorney for Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey on Tuesday argued in front of the state’s highest court that a judge erred when he ruled that Bailey overstepped his authority when he attempted to inflate the estimated cost of a ballot measure to restore abortion rights.
The Republican attorney general’s office appeared in front of the court to defend his decision to reject a fiscal note prepared by Republican Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick that estimated the ballot measure would have no cost to the state. Bailey argues that it should have included a projected loss of $12.5 billion in Medicaid dollars — a figure pushed by anti-abortion groups that Fitzpatrick says is inaccurate.
“The auditor could have and should have done more,” said Jason Lewis, an attorney for Bailey’s office, arguing that Fitzpatrick’s estimates were argumentative not Bailey’s.
Robert Tillman, an attorney for Fitzpatrick, argued that Bailey’s move was unprecedented and that the attorney general overstepped his authority.
“The attorney general’s interpretation (of state law) requires performing legal gymnastics…and leads to a multitude of preposterous results,” Tillman told the high court.
The fight between the lawyers for two statewide Republican officeholders happened in front of a crowded courtroom in the Missouri Supreme Court. The ACLU of Missouri filed suit in May, stating that Bailey overstepped his authority and was trying to delay the possibility of the measure reading the ballot in 2024.
Cole County Judge Jon Beetem ruled against Bailey last month and ordered the Republican to approve the fiscal notes filed by Fitzpatrick. Bailey ignored the order and appealed.
Tony Rothert, the director of integrated advocacy for the ACLU of Missouri, said in court that Bailey was deliberating delaying an initiative petition that he opposes — “stall, stall and stall.” Bailey’s actions were a threat to direct democracy, Rothert said.
“For more than a century this court has been the guardian of direct democracy,” he said.
At issue are 11 versions of a state constitutional amendment that would restore abortion rights in Missouri, where the procedure is almost entirely banned. Anna Fitz-James, a retired St. Louis doctor, submitted the proposals in March.
The legal standoff has delayed Missouri in finalizing the initiative petition, preventing supporters from gathering signatures, an arduous, expensive and time-intensive process.
The Missouri Supreme Court made no decision on Tuesday and said it would take the matter under advisement.
Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, who was dropped as a defendant in the lawsuit, faces a separate lawsuit from the ACLU of Missouri that accuses the Republican of crafting a misleading and unfair summary that would encourage Missourians to vote against the ballot measure.
Ashcroft, who is running for governor in 2024, has crafted a ballot summary for the petition which, in part, would ask voters to “allow for dangerous, unregulated, and unrestricted abortions.”
Missouri Right to Life, the state’s leading anti-abortion group, on Tuesday endorsed Ashcroft’s campaign for governor, saying he was “the candidate that we need to combat the abortion culture, save unborn babies and protect women.”
Tuesday’s court battle also came a day after U.S. Rep. Cori Bush, a Missouri Democrat, hosted a roundtable with House Democrats to discuss access to medication abortion and Republican efforts to ban abortion.
“In states like mine with abortion bans people are forced to find abortion pills online where they are cheap and they are widely available,” Bush said. “But it should not have to be that way. You should be able to get it as easily as any other safe, any other common, widely used medication.”
This story was originally published July 18, 2023 at 5:33 PM.
