WeVote
Log In

Bill

MM

Bill

SB 1746

SB 1746 - Currently, under Article V of the Missouri Constitution, judges of the Supreme Court of Missouri and of the Court of Appeals, judges in certain circuit courts, and certain associate circuit judges are selected by gubernatorial appointment following nominations from the nonpartisan commissions. This act provides for the election of all judges of the Supreme Court, of the Court of Appeals and of the circuit courts, and associate circuit judges, including methods for declaration of candidacy, nominating committees, and election contents. This act is contingent upon the passage of a constitutional amendment that requires the election of all judges. KATIE O'BRIEN

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Mike Moon

SB 1746 would replace Missouri's merit-based judicial appointment system with direct popular elections for all judges, shifting judicial selection power from appointed commissions to voters.

Second Read and Referred S Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1746

Legislative bill overview

SB 1746 would change Missouri's judicial selection system to require the election of all judges, rather than the current mixed system that uses merit-based appointment for some judicial positions. The bill fundamentally alters how Missourians select their judges at various court levels.

Why is this important

Missouri currently uses the "Missouri Plan" (merit selection) for appellate and some trial court judges, where a commission nominates candidates and the governor appoints them, followed by retention elections. This proposal would shift to direct popular election for all judicial positions, which could significantly affect judicial independence, campaign financing in judicial races, and the types of candidates who seek office.

Potential points of contention

  • Judicial independence vs. electoral pressure: Critics argue elected judges may feel pressure to rule based on public opinion or donor interests rather than law, while supporters contend voters should directly choose their judges
  • Campaign financing concerns: Direct elections typically require judges to fundraise, raising questions about whether donors gain influence over judicial decisions
  • Merit selection debate: Proponents of the current system argue merit-based selection produces more qualified, experienced judges; opponents view it as undemocratic gatekeeping

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.