• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: Missouri Supreme Court

Tears in the rain

04 Friday Sep 2026

Posted by Michael Bersin in Congress

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

5th Congressional District, gerrymandering, HB 1, Missouri Supreme Court, Redistricting, Rick Brattin, right wingnut, SC101805, Trump sycophant, whining

Rick Brattin (r) [2013 file photo].

Yesterday, after the Missouri Supreme Court overturned the right wingnut controlled General Assembly’s and right wingnut Governor Mike Kehoe’s hyper-partisan gerrymander of congressional districts for the 2026 general election:

Rick Brattin for Congress
[….]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SEPTEMBER 3, 2026

Rick Brattin Releases Statement on Missouri Supreme Court Decision in von Glahn v. Hoskins

(JEFFERSON CITY, MO) – State Senator Rick Brattin has released the following statement regarding the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision in von Glahn v. Hoskins:

“I’m not surprised that a liberal activist majority on the Missouri Supreme Court has handed Democrats a decision they desperately needed in their effort to help national Democrats retake the US House of Representatives, while also effectively invalidating a primary election that was held in accordance with a legal decision these same judges handed down. With the stroke of a pen, the Missouri Supreme Court has disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters who cast their ballot in the 5th District in the primary, only to be thrown into another district entirely – and with candidates they did not have a chance to vote on – for the General Election. This is blatantly unconstitutional. No court has ever reversed a Congressional map in the middle of an election because it is a complete show of disrespect for voters and for the sanctity of the electoral process. It is my hope that this rogue decision is immediately appealed to the United State Supreme Court.”
###

“…liberal activist majority on the Missouri Supreme Court…” Is somebody going to tell him?

You think he’s pissed because he’s going to have to collect and replant a shitload of 4 x 8 campaign signs? Just asking.

Some of the responses:

Sometimes the best thing to say is: Nothing.

Why wasn’t the citizen initiative certified for the primary? The justices addressed this. You should address your anger to Hoskins.

Rick, like I wrote on Mark’s page. The folks that plan on voting for you will vote for you. Go out and campaign. Leave this behind. All seven judges weighed in. The executive and legislative branch got checked by the judicial branch. I think I recall that’s how it supposed to work. Whining will make you look weak. Adult up and move on.

he should keep on whining and give the voters further proof of how he is either THAT ignorant, or THAT willing to lie to get into office.

have to be dumb af to vote for someone literally telling you he wishes our voices were not heard

Lol. Liberal activists judges…. the court said no so many times. You and your boy denny did this. Cheaters suck Rick. You suck. Can’t wait to defeat you.

So which of the 5 Republican appointed are part of the liberal activist majority?

There, somebody told him.

This is not a Republican victory or a Democratic victory. It is a victory for the people of Missouri.
Our Constitution declares that all political power is vested in and derived from the people. Political parties are factions; they are not the source of government’s authority. The Legislature may pass laws, but the Constitution reserves to the people the power to approve or reject those laws through referendum.
Seven judges unanimously affirmed that principle. Anyone attempting to reduce these decisions to “our party versus their party” is missing—or avoiding—the central issue:
The Constitution belongs to the people, and public officials of both parties are bound by it.

It was not “a liberal majority” – the decision was unanimous.

An Independent Commission screens judges that are appointed by the Governor. 5 by Republicans and 2 by Democrats. Politicians like Rick cry about a liberal court every time they lose a case. His opinion isn’t based on the legal facts.

Rick, why do you have to call names? Isn’t it possible that they simply followed the law?

Lol, your so call “liberal majority” on the MO supreme court is made up of 7 judges, 5 appointed by Republican governors. The ruling today was unanimous.

Talk about blatantly unconstitutional? How about changing the voting districts between census dates at the request of Trump who shouldn’t have made the request in the first place. The president of the United States should never involve himself with voting districts of any state. My interpretation of the Missouri Constitution regarding voting districts is that they are changed after a U.S. census which happens every ten years and the voting districts were just in 2022 following the 2020 census.

Allow me to translate:
“I have big feelings, bc my buddies Hoskins and Hanaway got slapped back UNANIMOUSLY by the MO Supreme Court. Their plot to gerrymander my weak campaign to a narrow lead has ended, and now I’m going to lose bigly.” 😭

Rick challenge you actually reply to this. Explain how 5 republicans and 2 democrats on a unanimous decision yesterday represents a “liberal activist majority?” I’ll wait.

What’s the matter? Afraid you won’t win if the people of the State, including the ones you’re supposed to represent, get to decide?

If Hoskins hadn’t waited until the 11th hour to act on the referendum, those votes wouldn’t have been affected. Can’t have your cake and eat it too.

“….The secretary [of State – Denny Hoskins] devotes a significant portion of his briefing to discussing the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties that may result from not utilizing the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 election. Besides being irrelevant to the secretary’s sole basis for declaring the referendum petition insufficient, these arguments are particularly misplaced given the secretary’s delay created the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties of which he complains….”

5 of the 7 MO Supreme Court judges were appointed by Republican governors.
The current seven judges of the Supreme Court of Missouri were appointed by the following governors Wesley Brent Powell (Chief Justice): Appointed by Governor Eric Greitens (R) in April 2017.
Zel Fischer: Appointed by Governor Matt Blunt (R) in October 2008.
Mary Rhodes Russell: Appointed by Governor Bob Holden (D) in September 2004.
Paul C. Wilson: Appointed by Governor Jay Nixon (D) in December 2012.
Robin Ransom: Appointed by Governor Mike Parson (R) in May 2021.
Kelly C. Broniec: Appointed by Governor Mike Parson (R) in September 2023.
Ginger Gooch: Appointed by Governor Mike Parson (R) in October 2023

He is saying the decision disenfranchises voters by letting voters vote on something.

Voting on matters that impact all voters should be voted on. What’s the problem?

More like conservative leaning unanimous decision

It is interesting that a unanimous ruling by seven judges including five appointed by Republican governors is a “liberal majority”. Please explain.

Hey Ricky, how about you do some research on how many judges were appointed by your party. Let me know if you need help doing the math

You knew darn well this was a risk if not a probability through the whole election. This is the f o part of fa

They got greedy.

Sorry Mr. Brattin, but Denny Hoskins done that all by himself, had he done his job, it would all been settled Aug. 4th.

==========

As said to the Governor; If this Representative Republic was meant to be run by NINE UNELECTED JUDGES, then it would not have an Executive and Legislative Branch. This is an unconstitutional ruling and should be ignored.

Actually, it’s seven judges. They are appointed by the sitting governor (chosen from among three put forward by an independent commission) and then face a statewide retention vote by Missouri voters in a general election. All seven sitting Missouri Supreme Court judges have been retained by the voters, two have been retained twice.

Don’t fall asleep in school, kids.

did you skip high school civics?

Good News! There’s not nine.

So you think court rulings can be ignored? These are not useless executive orders but conclusions reached by education, experienced judges.

==========

Why won’t you just listen to your constituents? That is the bottom line in all of this. The current administration has been trying to take away our right to rule out state since they were elected (remember amendments 4 and 5 last month) – they have forgotten that they work for us.
We just have to keep reminding them, is all.

At what point do you decide to stop embarrassing yourself?

The decision by the supreme court was UNANIMOUS. This means that ALL the judges agreed on the decision. If voters were disenfranchised with the use of the new map in the primary it is entirely the fault of the Secretary of State and the Attorney general who decided to go ahead with the new maps even in the face of the referendum petition. They are responsible for the fiasco.

In 1942, a constitutional amendment bearing the title “Nonpartisan Selection of Judges” was placed on the ballot and approved by a majority of the voters. The amendment applied only to judges of the Supreme Court, the three regional courts of appeal, and the circuit courts in the City of St. Louis and Jackson County. In later years, the voters of St. Louis County, Clay County, and Platte County have chosen to select their circuit and associate circuit judges in the same manner. The method of selection provided for in the 1940 amendment has been known as the “Missouri Plan.” It has been copied in whole and in part by quite a few states.
The selection is non partisan…
So, once again you think you are smarter than we, the people?

Your political advertising is laughable 🤡

Senator Brattin should read the opinion before attacking the Court.
The Missouri Supreme Court did not redraw a single district. It unanimously held that politicians cannot simply erase Missourians’ constitutional right to referendum. Five of the seven judges Brattin calls a “liberal activist majority” were appointed by Republican governors.
And his claim that judicial intervention in congressional maps is unprecedented is simply false.
The Court did not create this mess. Denny Hoskins sat on the petitions for nearly eight months and waited until the final deadline to reject them.
The Constitution belongs to the people, Senator. Not the Legislature. Not the Republican Party. The people.

So your pissed that the election in Missouri can’t be rigged?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but when the courts initially upheld the maps, they also said that the referendum could go forward. The fact that this had it’s day in court now is because Hoskins played games and waited until the primaries to refuse to certify. The MO Supreme Court even cautioned him against running down the clock on the hearings. This is Hoskin’s fault.
Also, what do you call ignoring 300,000 signatures saying we want our say first? Because that sounds a lot more like disenfranchising voters than people who lost out on a primary vote. Especially one that ran out of Democratic ballots in multiple locations. If Republicans had any confidence in their own party, they wouldn’t need these maps, these stupid certifying games, or to try and plant drugs on their opponents. Worry about that first, Bratin.

The Republicans have a supermajority on the State Supreme Court, you absolute clown.
Please show us where the liberal activist majority is on the Republican supermajority doll.

Maybe your friend the secretary of state shouldnt have dragged his feet doing his job processing the petitions if he didnt want this to be getting litigated in the middle of the election. But ofc he didnt, because he was hoping if he slacked long enough that there wouldnt be time and the voters of missouri could be effectively silenced. Its so fun to watch yall make up reasons to be outraged when you finally get called on your bs

Denny Hoskins is responsible for “invalidating a primary election”. He should not have used the map in the primary until this played out in court. He knew this would happen. He planned on this chaos. This is his doing. If you’re upset about a primary being “invalidated” then you need to impeach Hoskins. 👍

Oxygen thief.

‘a liberal activist majority on the Missouri Supreme Court” BRATTIN ARE YOU ON ACID? OR JUST EFFIN STUPID?

Something something snowflakes

There is absolutely nothing about any of the branches of our state government that is “liberal”.
You’re just a crybaby

You started this clown show, Buddy!

Chaser:

In 2022 Rick Brattin (r) ran in the republican primary in the 4th Congressional District. “Missourians for Truth”, a PAC, spent money on mailings opposed to Rick Brattin and supporting Mark Alford (r). Mark Alford won the primary. The images from the mailings were priceless:

Our favorite image from those mailings:

Rick Brattin could have filed in the 4th Congressional District republican primary, facing Mark Alford again. But he didn’t.

Previously:

HB 1: Gerrymander this (September 9, 2025)

Can play with AI, can’t be bothered to certify petition signatures (June 7, 2026)

Denny Hoskins (r) is a pre-eminent legal scholar and final arbiter of the Missouri Constitution, said no one ever… (August 4, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court: “HB 1 congressional redistricting, yeah, no.” (September 3, 2026)

Favorite whine (September 3, 2026)

Gov. Mike Kehoe (r) thinks we’re all ignorant and stupid (September 3, 2026)

What the Missouri Supreme Court said (September 3, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court slaps down Denny Hoskins (r)….again (September 4, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court slaps down Denny Hoskins (r)….again

04 Friday Sep 2026

Posted by Michael Bersin in Congress, Missouri General Assembly

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

clown, Congress, Denny Hoskins, Donald Trump, General Assembly, gerrymander, HB 1, Mike Kehoe, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court, order, Redistricting, referendum, SC101805

Today, from the Missouri Supreme Court:

SC101805 – RICHARD VON GLAHN APEL V DENNY HOSKINS RES

09/04/2026
Overruled
Order issued: Respondent’s motion for a stay of injunction pending emergency appeal and application for stay to the Supreme Court of the United States overruled.
Associated Entries: 09/03/2026 – Motion for Stay –
Motion for a Stay of Injunction Pending Emergency Appeal and Application for Stay to the Supreme Court of the United States; Exhibit A – Declaration of Denny Hoskins in Support of Respondents Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal; Electronic Filing Certificate of Service.

[emphasis in original]

Denny Hoskins (r) [2022 file photo].

From yesterday’s Missouri Supreme Court decision:

….The secretary [of State – Denny Hoskins] and all of those acting in concert with him are restrained and enjoined from implementing, using, or mandating the use of the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 general election….

Restrained and enjoined.

Yesterday:

STATEMENT FROM SECRETARY OF STATE DENNY HOSKINS, CPA

For Immediate Release: Sept. 3, 2026

“Today’s Missouri Supreme Court rulings ignite nothing short of a Constitutional crisis. No court has ever rejected a congressional map that had already been used in an election, as the Missouri First Map was in the August primary.

We may have lost the battle today, but the war to preserve our constitutional republic is far from over. As I’ve said throughout this process, I will not be intimidated, I will not be deterred, I remain steadfast in my fight to defend the United States and Missouri Constitutions. As a fifth-generation Missourian, I will proudly fall on my sword to save this great state from out-of-state special interests and their out-of-state sugar daddies. Missouri will not become another New York City or Los Angeles on my watch.”

From yesterday’s Missouri Supreme Court decision:

….The secretary [of State – Denny Hoskins] devotes a significant portion of his briefing to discussing the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties that may result from not utilizing the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 election. Besides being irrelevant to the secretary’s sole basis for declaring the referendum petition insufficient, these arguments are particularly misplaced given the secretary’s delay created the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties of which he complains….

Previously:

HB 1: Gerrymander this (September 9, 2025)

Can play with AI, can’t be bothered to certify petition signatures (June 7, 2026)

Denny Hoskins (r) is a pre-eminent legal scholar and final arbiter of the Missouri Constitution, said no one ever… (August 4, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court: “HB 1 congressional redistricting, yeah, no.” (September 3, 2026)

Favorite whine (September 3, 2026)

Gov. Mike Kehoe (r) thinks we’re all ignorant and stupid (September 3, 2026)

What the Missouri Supreme Court said (September 3, 2026)

What the Missouri Supreme Court said

04 Friday Sep 2026

Posted by Michael Bersin in Congress

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

gerrymandering, HB 1, missouri, Missouri Democratic Party, Missouri Supreme Court, referendum, Russ Carnahan, SC101805

Russ Carnahan, Chair, Missouri Democratic Party [2026 file photo].

Last night:

Missouri Democratic Party Celebrates State Supreme Court Defeat of Attacks on Rights of All Missourians

Missouri Democratic Party Chair Russ Carnahan has issued the following statement following the unanimous rulings from the Missouri Supreme Court siding with Missourians over Secretary of State Denny Hoskins:

“Today is a clear and historic victory for the rights of all Missourians — Republicans, Democrats, and independents — and a clear rebuke of attacks on our rights as citizens by Republican politicians.

“Back when Hoskins’ launched his desperate and partisan attempt to avoid the will of Missourians, we said that, after a brief court battle, Missourians would get to vote and we were absolutely right. It’s just unfortunate that so much taxpayer money had to be wasted by Secretary Hoskins along the way.”

###

Previously:

HB 1: Gerrymander this (September 9, 2025)

Can play with AI, can’t be bothered to certify petition signatures (June 7, 2026)

Denny Hoskins (r) is a pre-eminent legal scholar and final arbiter of the Missouri Constitution, said no one ever… (August 4, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court: “HB 1 congressional redistricting, yeah, no.” (September 3, 2026)

Favorite whine (September 3, 2026)

Gov. Mike Kehoe (r) thinks we’re all ignorant and stupid (September 3, 2026)

Favorite whine

03 Thursday Sep 2026

Posted by Michael Bersin in Congress, social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Donald Trump, Fascist pig, gerrymandering, HB 1, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court, Redistricting, referendum, SC101805, social media

Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…

This evening:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

The Missouri Supreme Court just ridiculously ruled in favor of changing the maps back to what they were a long time ago. It’s called, Ancient History! The problem is, according to Legal Scholars, that not only was the ruling horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional, but there won’t be enough time to change the map back with the Election coming up in a very short period of time. The Election Process, as usual, is being disturbed in America! Missouri must be able to use the map that was in effect just a couple of months ago, in the Primary. This is a Dark Day for “Justice” in Missouri! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP

2.06k ReTruths 6.24k Likes Sep 03, 2026, 6:16 PM

“Gerrymander This”

Previously:

HB 1: Gerrymander this (September 9, 2025)

Can play with AI, can’t be bothered to certify petition signatures (June 7, 2026)

Denny Hoskins (r) is a pre-eminent legal scholar and final arbiter of the Missouri Constitution, said no one ever… (August 4, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court: “HB 1 congressional redistricting, yeah, no.” (September 3, 2026)

Missouri Supreme Court: “HB 1 congressional redistricting, yeah, no.”

03 Thursday Sep 2026

Posted by Michael Bersin in Congress, Missouri General Assembly

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Congress, Denny Hoskins, Donald Trump, General Assembly, gerrymander, HB 1, Mike Kehoe, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court, Redistricting, referendum, SC101805

“…The secretary [of State – Denny Hoskins (r)] devotes a significant portion of his briefing to discussing the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties that may result from not utilizing the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 election. Besides being irrelevant to the secretary’s sole basis for declaring the referendum petition insufficient, these arguments are particularly misplaced given the secretary’s delay created the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties of which he complains…”

That’s what you call a good old-fashioned judicial smackdown.

Denny Hoskins (r) [2022 file photo].

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled today, 7-0, that the right wingnut controlled Missouri General Assembly’s mid-decade congressional gerrymander in HB 1 is void, stating, “…HB 1 is not the law and has never been the law…” Missouri congressional districts revert to the 2022 redistricting.

In their conclusion in SC101805: Richard von Glahn, Appellant, vs. Denny Hoskins, in His Official Capacity, et al., Respondents.

[….]

This Court reverses the circuit court’s judgment. The referendum petition was legal, sufficient, and timely, and the secretary incorrectly concluded otherwise. HB 1 did not go into effect and will not go into effect unless and until approved by the voters. The congressional redistricting the General Assembly established in 2022 remains in full force and effect for the November 2026 general election.

Pursuant to Rule 84.14, this Court enters judgment ordering the secretary to issue a certificate of sufficiency as to the referendum petition (2026-R004) (attaching a copy of this opinion thereto), to place the referendum petition on the November 2026 general election ballot, and to take any and all additional steps necessary to place the referendum petition on the ballot at that election before September 8, 2026. The secretary and all of those acting in concert with him are restrained and enjoined from implementing, using, or mandating the use of the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 general election or at any other time thereafter unless and until HB 1 is approved by the voters at the November 2026 general election and takes effect 30 days thereafter. Mo. Const. art. XII, sec. 2(b). No Rule 84.17 motions are permitted.

[….]

There will be no rehearing. The decision is final.

There’s also a lengthy footnote in the decision:

[….]

[8] The secretary devotes a significant portion of his briefing to discussing the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties that may result from not utilizing the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 election. Besides being irrelevant to the secretary’s sole basis for declaring the referendum petition insufficient, these arguments are particularly misplaced given the secretary’s delay created the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties of which he complains. In December 2025, a federal district court advised the secretary and the state that, if the referendum petition is sufficient, “the new map will be frozen until after the referendum, which could significantly disrupt the 2026 elections.” Mo. Gen. Assembly v. Von Glahn, No. 4:25-CV-1535-ZMB, 2025 WL 3514277, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 8, 2025). At the same time, the federal district court noted the secretary had the ability to declare the petition insufficient based on his argument in the federal litigation—identical to his argument now—that the Missouri Constitution does not permit a referendum as to congressional redistricting passed by the General Assembly. Id. at *4. “[T]here is no apparent reason why [the secretary] would incur the significant cost of signature verification given his stated belief that the petition is constitutionally deficient.” Id. at *2 n.2. In two separate cases in May, this Court stated it could not determine whether the congressional redistricting in HB 1 was in effect until the secretary issued his certification and the judicial review authorized by the General Assembly was complete. Maggard, 733 S.W.3d at 419-20; NAACP, 734 S.W.3d at 341 n.4. Despite this clear guidance from the federal district court and this Court, the secretary chose to delay his certification until the last possible day—August 4—and, in the meantime, utilized the congressional redistricting in HB 1 while incurring the time and expense of signature verification despite having represented to the federal district court he believed the referendum petition was constitutionally deficient. The secretary also chose to request verification of every signature, making the signature verification deadline July 28, when he could have chosen random sampling verification, with a deadline of not more than 30 days from the date the election authority received the petition from the secretary. See sec. 116.130.2. The secretary delayed certification until the last possible date and chose not to seek resolution of the constitutional question despite having been told at least as early as December 2025 he had the unique ability as secretary to do so under Missouri statutes. Given these undisputed facts, the secretary’s arguments about confusion, expense, and practical
difficulties are wholly unpersuasive.

Perhaps worse, these arguments fundamentally misunderstand the status of HB 1 pending the referendum vote. HB 1 is not the law and has never been the law. There is only one valid congressional redistricting in effect—the congressional redistricting the General Assembly established in 2022. Under article III, section 52(b), HB 1 “shall take effect when approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon, and not otherwise.” Unless and until the voters approve HB 1 at the November 2026 general election, HB 1 is of no force and effect and did not take effect on December 11 because it is subject to a sufficient referendum petition filed on December 9. Regardless of any confusion, expense, or practical difficulties caused by the secretary’s delay and incorrect assumption about whether the referendum petition would be deemed sufficient, simply continuing to utilize the congressional redistricting in HB 1 does not comport with the Missouri Constitution because the 2022 map is the only map in effect.

[….]

Dayam.

Previously:

HB 1: Gerrymander this (September 9, 2025)

Can play with AI, can’t be bothered to certify petition signatures (June 7, 2026)

Denny Hoskins (r) is a pre-eminent legal scholar and final arbiter of the Missouri Constitution, said no one ever… (August 4, 2026)

Mark Alford (r): difficulty keeping up, as usual

10 Tuesday Sep 2024

Posted by Michael Bersin in Congress, Mark Alford, social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

4th Congressional District, abortion, former newsreader, initiative, Mark Alford, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court, Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, right wingnut, social media, women's health care, women's reproductive health

Mark Alford (r) [2024 file photo].

Pre 1973 2024 medical equipment.

This afternoon:

Congressman Mark Alford
[September 10, 2024]
Amendment 3 is a radical proposal that goes far beyond abortion. The Progressive Democrat tricksters pushing this measure completely misled the public about the real truth of Amendment 3 and the staggering scope of laws it would invalidate.
We cannot allow organizations to mislead voters like this, and today’s decision allowing Amendment 3 to remain on the ballot is a profound disappointment. It’s a loss for our Constitution, a loss for the people of Missouri, and a loss for Life.
As the Congressman for Missouri’s Fourth District, I’m committed to fighting for every constituent – born and unborn. We believe in life affirming care for the mother and the baby that God is growing inside of her.

Some of the responses:

I totally disagree. The Supreme Court overturned roe v wade making it a states issue. The people of the state will have an opportunity to vote to embed it in our states constitution. We will see what the people of Missouri have to say in November.

That’s what Mark Alford (r) is afraid of.

I thought you were for states’ right to vote on issues like this. Missouri’s republican legislature routinely overturns the will of the voters. We Are Not Going Back!
Vote blue for democracy, and you’ll only have to vote democratic this one time and in four years, you can go back to voting party lines, people! Listen to all the republicans who are voting for Harris/Walz because trump’s republican party isn’t the republican party anymore, but the party of Putin.

“Make America Great Again” – in Russian.

Inaccurate information on Amendment 3 has come from Missouri’s Secretary of State, Jay Ashcroft. Twice, Missouri judges have ruled that Secretary Ashcroft’s characterization of the proposed amendment was inaccurate, leading a Missouri (Republican) judge to rewrite the description of the amendment that will appear on the November ballot. Today, the Missouri Supreme Court directed Secretary Ashcroft to “take all steps necessary to ensure that it is on said ballot,”

Not misled. They read it and supported it. Now we all get to vote on it. As it should be. As a FEDERAL official you have NO say in this matter. Get to work on that budget CR.

That sounds great sir. Could you and your party stop using disinformation in your campaigns too? Most of the false information I read comes from the GOP.

How’s that working real hard for us not to be divided thing working out for ya??? Marky

I am confused. I thought this was NOT going to be on the ballot. Now it is?

Low information voter.

Yes, it Will be on the ballot. The People won today. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled in favor of the People, despite all the foolery and lies spread by Bailey and Ashcroft.

Light on details, as usual Congressman Mark Alford

You’re full of it. The petition clearly outlined exactly how it would appear on the ballot. And it passed that test multiple times. What’s radical is the massive efforts taken to try to usurp the MO Constitution by Republicans.
Respect the law. And respect the people. Those voters will choose and your opinion doesn’t matter you sell out.

Bs, Alford. Quit spreading disinformation.

Your repeated lies about it won’t ever make it true. The Amendment is available for anyone to read. The People won today. The People will vote on November 5th. And the People overwhelming believe Healthcare decisions and Reproductive Rights are PRIVATE with no room or reason for government to be involved.

“We cannot allow organizations to mislead voters like this.”
That’s your calling card, Mark.
It’s simple: Read the actual amendment before voting.

More lies, Mark?
You know God hates liars, right?
Why are you so scared to let CITIZENS have their say?
Are they too dumb to read and understand what they’re voting on? Is that the level of confidence you have in them?

Previously:

Missouri Supreme Court: Amendment 3 is on the November 5, 2024 ballot (September 10, 2024)

Banana Republic – It’s a cult

01 Monday Jul 2024

Posted by Michael Bersin in Eric Schmitt, social media, US Senate

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

34 felony convictions, Donald Trump, Eric Schmitt, Fascist pig, immunity, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court, presidential immunity, right wingnut, sycophant, U.S. Senate

“…Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop…”

Eric Schmitt
[July 1, 2024]
They thought they could bury Trump and hide Biden.
They were wrong on both accounts.

Fascist pig.

Some of the responses:

Trump buried himself. 30 lies in one debate!

If Trump can get out in front of a Jan 6th crowd & lie about voter machine fraud in Michigan to get them all worked up. Then tweet about his own Vice President which immediately was read to the mob by a loud speaker, having the mob begin to chant “Hang Pence” as they entered the Capital building, I think you’re right. Trumps capable of anything at this point.

That is a very pretty piece of propaganda, but has no more meaning behind it than ‘Plop, plop, fizz, fizz’.

Herr Schmitt has no idea what he is ranting about.

Never before have we had a president say in a debate @i did not have sex with a porn star” ( even though he appears in pictures with her and she and his attorney testified under oath that he did) while his wife was pregnant- what a bunch of SCUM

well for starters the Court more or less handed Trump a Drumhead, since now Biden can in theory go after Trump directly and say ex throw him in Gitmo or have him liquidated under this umbrella of full presidential immunity. Biden need not fear Congress or the Courts since he has been made King with this ruling. He can cancel elections and do essentially what Trump and the Heritage Foundation plan on doing with their Project 2025. So in truth Trump might just have played the wrong card

This why we can’t have nice things.

You misspelled CONVICT and HONOR. Let’s see what spews from your felonious supporting mouth on JULY 11.

34 felony convictions, just to be exact.

Eric Schmitt and his ass kissing

Eric Schmitt (r) [2022 file photo].

Previously:

Banana Republic (July 1, 2024)

Banana Republic – Rule of law? What rule of law? (July 1, 2024)

And Jay Ashcroft (r) wants to be governor

20 Monday Nov 2023

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

abortion, Andrew Bailey, Elad Gross, initiative, Jay Ashcroft, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court, women's health care

The slow walk by Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (r) and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (r) has ended.

Jay Ashcroft (r) [2019 file photo].

This evening:

Missouri Supreme Court declines to consider appeal from Sec. of State Jay Ashcroft
By Joe McLean (KCTV5)
Published: Nov. 20, 2023 at 6:59 PM CST|Updated: 53 minutes ago
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (KCTV) – The Missouri Supreme Court declined to take up an appeal from Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft.

He was challenging an appeals court decision that ruled his ballot language for an abortion initiative was too biased and argumentative.

This means that the appeals court decision will stand — keeping the court-approved ballot language.

The court also declined to take up the case challenging the fiscal note summary, meaning the ballot will reflect the Auditor’s summary, not Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s “$12.5 billion” figure.

It also means that abortion rights activists will soon be able to begin collecting more than 171,000 signatures by May 6 in order to secure ballot access.

Remember next November.

Elad Gross For Missouri
[November 20, 2023]
Jay Ashcroft and Andrew Bailey appealed to Missouri’s Supreme Court in their attempt to issue biased language for the initiative petition to overturn our extreme abortion ban.
The Supreme Court just rejected their appeal.
Their attempts to run out the clock and stop Missourians from accessing the ballot has ended.

Elad Gross (D) [2023 file photo].

Previously:

Jay Ashcroft (r) spins frantically (November 3, 2023)

Next (November 8, 20223)

Ashcroft the Ballot Bully (November 12, 2023)

Mandamus

22 Saturday Jul 2023

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

abortion, abortion rights, Andrew Bailey, clown, initiative petition, mandamus, missouri, Missouri Attorney General, Missouri Supreme Court, Scott Fitzpatrick, State Auditor

Missouri Supreme Court rejects AG’s push to inflate cost of abortion-rights amendment
BY: JASON HANCOCK – JULY 20, 2023 1:46 PM

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s efforts to inflate the cost of an abortion-rights initiative petition were unanimously rejected by the state Supreme Court Thursday, just two days after judges heard arguments in the case.

The quick verdict, which was written by Judge Paul Wilson, was scathing in its opinion of Bailey’s refusal to sign off on the work of Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick, concluding that nothing in state law “gives the attorney general authority to question the auditor’s assessment of the fiscal impact of a proposed petition.”

The ruling upheld Cole County Circuit Court Judge Jon Beetem’s ruling last month ordering Bailey to sign off on Fitzpatrick’s fiscal summary within 24 hours.

[….]

Do your job, Andrew Bailey (r).

From the Missouri Supreme Court [No. SC100132] on Friday:

[….]

Dr. Anna Fitz-James (“Fitz-James”) filed a petition in the circuit court of Cole County seeking a writ of mandamus compelling Attorney General Andrew Bailey (“Attorney General”) to approve fiscal note summaries for 11 proposed initiative petitions she had filed with Secretary of State John Ashcroft(“Secretary”). After briefing and argument, the circuit court made permanent its writ of mandamus ordering the Attorney General to do so and to forward notice of that approval to State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick (“Auditor”). The Attorney General appealed, and this Court has jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3 of the Missouri Constitution.

Nothing in section 116.1751 gives the Attorney General authority to question the Auditor’s assessment of the fiscal impact of a proposed petition. Instead, the Attorney General’s authority extends only to reviewing the “legal content and form” of the fiscal notes and summaries prepared by the Auditor, not their substance. Because the circuit court in this case did not err in finding there was no defect in the “legal form and content” of the fiscal note summaries prepared by the Auditor concerning Fitz-James’s proposed initiative petitions, 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 Attorney General was to have performed that task within 10 days of receiving the fiscal notes and summaries from the Auditor, a period that expired more than three months ago. Accordingly, the circuit court’s decision to make permanent its writ of mandamus requiring the Attorney General to perform that duty is affirmed.

[….]

The Auditor disagreed and, on April 21, resubmitted the original fiscal notes and fiscal note summaries to the Attorney General. The Auditor informed the Attorney General that the fiscal notes and summaries complied with the requirements set forth in chapter 116 and that the Attorney General exceeded his review authority under section 116.175.4. On May 1, the Attorney General notified the Auditor that he disagreed and refused to approve the fiscal notes and summaries and that he had fulfilled his statutory duties.

Because of this logjam, the Secretary could not – and, to this day, cannot – complete his duty by certifying the official ballot titles for the proposed petitions. The ballot title is comprised of two parts: a “summary statement” and the fiscal note summary. § 116.180. Pursuant to section 116.334.1, the Secretary prepared a “summary statement” for each of the proposed petitions and sent them to the Attorney General for his review as to “legal content and form.” The Attorney General approved them and notified the Secretary of that approval. Under section 116.180, however, the Secretary cannot certify the official ballot title for any of the proposed petitions until he receives both the approved summary statement and the approved fiscal note summary (as well as the fiscal note) pertaining to that proposed petition. Because the Attorney General refuses to perform his duty, neither the Auditor nor the Secretary can perform his.

[….]

Conclusion

This Court has often repeated the importance of the right to initiative enshrined in the Missouri Constitution:

Nothing in our constitution so closely models participatory democracy in its pure form. Through the initiative process, those who have no access to or influence with elected representatives may take their cause directly to the people. The people, from who all constitutional authority is derived, have reserved the “power to propose and enact or reject laws and amendments to the Constitution.”

[….]

…If technical formalities cannot stand in the way, a failure to perform a clear and unequivocal duty must not be allowed to do so either. If the Attorney General had complied with his duty to approve the Auditor’s fiscal note summaries in the time prescribed by section 116.175.4, the Secretary would have certified the official ballot titles for Fitz-James’s initiative petitions nearly 100 days ago.

For the reasons set for above, the circuit court’s judgment is affirmed.

[….]

And that is what you call a slam dunk.

Previously:

Things > People (May 17, 2023)

Who? What? Who? (May 23, 2023)

Per curiam

23 Friday Jul 2021

Posted by Michael Bersin in Healthcare, Missouri General Assembly

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

General Assembly, Medicaid expansion, missouri, Missouri Supreme Court

“Listen to the people” “Medicaid expansion is good for Missouri’s health” [July 1, 2021, Jefferson City, Missouri]

Yesterday:

Crystal Quade @crystal_quade
My statement on the Supreme Court upholding the Medicaid expansion amendment:

Today’s unanimous Missouri Supreme Court decision is a complete vindication for those who have worked to expand health care access and a thorough rejection of those willing to defy Missouri voters
[….]
1/2
12:22 PM · Jul 22, 2021

Crystal Quade @crystal_quade
…and ignore the rule of law to stop it from happening. We expect the trial judge will follow the Supreme Court’s clear direction and promptly order the state to begin providing Medicaid services to the expanded population as mandated by the Missouri Constitution.

2/2 #MoLeg
12:22 PM · Jul 22, 2021

House Democratic Minority Leader Crystal Quade [2018 file photo].

In the Missouri Constitution:

IV Section 36(c). MO HealthNet expansion — eligibility — state plan amendments — maximization of federal participation — limitation on burdens or restrictions. — 1. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, beginning July 1, 2021, individuals nineteen years of age or older and under sixty-five years of age who qualify for MO HealthNet services under 42 U.S.C. Section 1396a(a)(10)(A)(i)(VIII) and as set forth in 42 C.F.R. 435.119, and who have income at or below one hundred thirty-three percent of the federal poverty level plus five percent of the applicable family size as determined under 42 U.S.C. Section 1396a(e)(14) and as set forth in 42 C.F.R. 435.603, shall be eligible for medical assistance under MO HealthNet and shall receive coverage for the health benefits service package.

  2. For purposes of this section “health benefits service package” shall mean benefits covered by the MO HealthNet program as determined by the department of social services to meet the benchmark or benchmark-equivalent coverage requirement under 42 U.S.C. Section 1396a(k)(1) and any implementing regulations.

  3. No later than March 1, 2021, the Department of Social Services and the MO HealthNet Division shall submit all state plan amendments necessary to implement this section to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

  4. The Department of Social Services and the MO HealthNet Division shall take all actions necessary to maximize federal financial participation in funding medical assistance pursuant to this section.

  5. No greater or additional burdens or restrictions on eligibility or enrollment standards, methodologies, or practices shall be imposed on persons eligible for MO HealthNet services pursuant to this section than on any other population eligible for medical assistance.

  6. All references to federal or state statutes, regulations or rules in this section shall be to the version of those statutes, regulations or rules that existed on January 1, 2019.

­­——–

(Adopted August 4, 2020)

Yesterday, from the Missouri Supreme Court:

SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI
en banc

STEPHANIE DOYLE, et al., Opinion issued July 22, 20212 No. SC99185
Appellants,
LUKE BARBER and CHRISTINE )
CHANEY,
Appellants,

v.

JENNIFER TIDBALL, et al.,
Respondents.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY
The Honorable Jon E. Beetem, Judge

PER CURIAM

Stephanie Doyle, Melinda Hille, and Autumn Stultz, three Missourians who are eligible for MO HealthNet coverage under article IV, section 36(c) of the Missouri Constitution, (“Plaintiffs”) brought suit challenging the refusal by the Department of Social Services (“DSS”) to provide that coverage because the General Assembly failed to appropriate adequate funding. The circuit court rejected Plaintiffs’ claims because it found the ballot initiative that enacted article IV, section 36(c) violated article III, section 51 of the Missouri Constitution, which prohibits initiatives from appropriating money without creating revenue to fund the initiative. Because article IV, section 36(c) does not appropriate money and does not remove the General Assembly’s discretion in appropriating money to MO HealthNet, the circuit court erred in declaring article IV, section 36(c) constitutionally invalid. The circuit court’s judgment is affirmed in part and vacated in part, and the cause remanded for the circuit court to enter judgment for the Plaintiffs, which includes determination of the appropriate injunctive relief.

[….]

Nothing in article IV, section 36(c) deprives the General Assembly of its discretion and requires it to appropriate a specified amount for MO HealthNet services and benefits. The General Assembly maintains the discretion to decide whether and to what extent it will appropriate money for MO HealthNet programs. 4 Even though it is highly possible the General Assembly appropriated less money than MO HealthNet programs are estimated to cost in FY 2022, the consequences of failing to fund MO HealthNet fully at the outset or even with a supplemental appropriation are not before this Court because they are not relevant to whether article IV, section 36(c) violates article III, section 51. Because article IV, section 36(c) does not expressly appropriate money for MO HealthNet nor deprive the General Assembly of discretion and require it to appropriate money for its purposes, it does not violate article III, section 51.

[….]

The General Assembly chose to appropriate funds for the MO HealthNet programs for FY 2022. This was one of presumably thousands of difficult decisions made each year during the appropriation process. But, having made this decision, DSS and MO HealthNet are bound by article IV, section 36(c) concerning which individuals are eligible to enroll when it spends the appropriated funds. Consequently, DSS has appropriation authority to provide services for all individuals eligible for MO HealthNet, including individuals eligible for coverage and services pursuant to article IV, section 36(c).

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above, the circuit court’s judgment is affirmed only insofar as it overruled the Proposed Intervenors’ motion to intervene. In all other respects, the judgment is vacated, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court to enter judgment for the Plaintiffs, which includes determination of the appropriate injunctive relief.

All concur.

“All concur”.

“Medicaid expansion is the law of the land” [July 1, 2021, Jefferson City, Missouri]

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Recent Posts

  • Campaign Finance: there’s plenty more
  • Here we are
  • Campaign Finance: off to the races – part 7
  • Mark Alford (r) steps on a rake…again
  • Hey, Denny (r)…

Recent Comments

Campaign Finance: th… on Campaign Finance: Next
Michael Bersin on Here we are
Bob Yates on Campaign Finance: off to the r…
Campaign Finance: of… on Campaign Finance: off to the r…
Campaign Finance: of… on Campaign Finance: off to the r…

Archives

  • September 2026
  • August 2026
  • July 2026
  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 1,086,610 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

Loading Comments...