Bill overview
HB 3389 (2026, Missouri) modifies the offense of tampering with a judicial officer. The bill is sponsored with a co-sponsor noted as Scott Cupps and has progressed through early chamber readings with a referral to the Emerging Issues committee.
Purpose and intent
- The primary aim is to alter existing statutes related to tampering with a judicial officer. While the exact language is not provided here, the bill’s title and formal action history indicate changes to elements, definitions, penalties, or enforcement related to harming, intimidating, threatening, or interfering with a judge or other judicial officer in the performance of duties.
- The reform likely seeks to strengthen protections for judicial officers, deter interference, and clarify the scope of conduct that constitutes tampering.
Key provisions and changes (as generally anticipated from the title)
Note: The specific statutory text is not provided in the summary. Based on the bill’s title, expected areas of change may include:
- Broadening or refining the definition of “tampering with a judicial officer” to encompass additional forms of interference or threats.
- Clarifying the conduct that qualifies as tampering (e.g., threats, harassment, intimidation, retaliation, or attempts to influence judicial action).
- Adjusting the penalties (class, imprisonment duration, fines) or adding enhancements for certain aggravating factors (e.g., while in proximity to the officer, against a family member, using weapons).
- Establishing or updating procedural elements (e.g., prosecutorial discretion, proof requirements, aggravating circumstances, or restitution provisions).
- Aligning the statute with other related offenses (e.g., unlawful influence, sanctity of the judiciary, or harassment laws).
Who or what would be affected
- Judicial officers in Missouri (including judges, magistrates, and others designated as judicial officers) would be protected under the amended offense.
- Individuals and entities accused of tampering, threatening, or interfering with a judicial officer could be subject to updated criminal charges and penalties.
- Law enforcement, prosecutors, and the judiciary may see changes in enforcement priorities, charging decisions, and case handling related to threats or interference involving judges.
Procedural and timeline aspects
- Status: Referred to Emerging Issues (H) on 2026-05-15, indicating the bill is under consideration for potential broader or more complex legislative discussion.
- Earlier actions:
- Read Second Time on 2026-02-25
- Introduced and Read First Time on 2026-02-24
- The committee in Emerging Issues will likely review draft language, assess impact, and may propose amendments before a potential floor vote.
- If enacted, the effective date is typically specified in the bill’s text and may range from immediate upon enactment to a future date.
Potential impacts to monitor
- Changes in penalties could affect sentencing guidelines and judicial officer protection levels.
- Clarifications to the offense may impact prosecution strategies and the handling of cases involving threats or harassment directed at judges.
- Any new language regarding offenses near judicial proceedings or during the performance of official duties could influence enforcement in courthouses and related settings.
If you’d like, I can tailor this summary once the bill’s actual text is available to confirm exact definitions, offense elements, and penalty provisions.
