AG Bailey had no authority to inflate cost of abortion petition, MO Supreme Court rules
.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.")
The Missouri Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that state Attorney General Andrew Bailey overstepped his authority when he tried to increase the projected cost of a ballot measure to restore abortion rights.
The unanimous decision reaffirms a ruling by Cole County Judge Jon Beetem requiring Bailey, a Republican, to approve a series of identical fiscal notes filed by Republican Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick. The estimates say that the ballot measure would have no cost to the state.
Bailey argued that the estimates should have included a projected loss of $12.5 billion in Medicaid dollars — a figure pushed by anti-abortion groups that Fitzpatrick said was inaccurate.
“The Attorney General’s refusal to perform the plain, unequivocal, and ministerial duty of approving those summaries (and informing the Auditor he has done so) cannot be justified,” the order written by Judge Paul C. Wilson said.
The scathing decision found that nothing in state law “gives the Attorney General authority to question the Auditor’s assessment of the fiscal impact of a proposed petition.”
If Bailey had done his job and approved Fitzpatrick’s estimates, the ruling said, Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft would have certified the ballot titles “nearly 100 days ago.”
The ruling by the state’s highest court marks a major win for abortion rights supporters in Missouri. However, state officials still have to certify the measure before supporters can start collecting signatures for the petition to reach the ballot in 2024.
“We disagree with the Court’s decision, as we believe Missourians deserve to know how much this amendment would cost the state, but we will respect the Court’s order,” Bailey spokesperson Madeline Sieren said in an email.
Fitzpatrick in a statement Thursday said that he has consistently pushed against abortion and will vote against the petitions if they reach the ballot. However, he said his “personal stance cannot compromise the duty my office has to provide a fair assessment of their cost to the state.”
“I want to thank the court for protecting a process that had worked for decades without controversy and will now continue to provide Missourians with the impartial information they are entitled to when they go to vote,” he said.
The ACLU of Missouri filed suit in May, stating that Bailey overstepped his authority and was trying to delay the possibility of the measure reaching the ballot in 2024.
“While today is a tremendous victory for Missourians and the right to direct democracy, it is clear that some who hold office will not hesitate to trample the constitution if it advances their personal interests and political beliefs,” Luz María Henríquez, the ACLU of Missouri’s executive director said in a statement Thursday. “The ACLU of Missouri will continue to hold politicians accountable to our Constitution and protect Missourians’ right to direct democracy.”
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.
Ashcroft, who was dropped as a defendant in the lawsuit, faces a separate lawsuit from the ACLU of Missouri that accuses the Republican secretary of state 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.”
This story was originally published July 20, 2023 at 1:44 PM.
