WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SJR 122

SJR 122 - Currently, 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 nonpartisan commissions. This proposed constitutional amendment, if approved by the voters, would require the election of all judges of the Supreme Court, of the Court of Appeals and of the circuit courts and associate circuit judges. A judge with an existing term as of January 1, 2027, may continue to serve until the expiration of his or her term. A vacancy in the office of judge shall be filled by an election. This amendment is similar to HJR 16 (2017) and HJR 50 (2004). KATIE O'BRIEN

2026 Regular Session

Missouri would replace most judicial appointments with statewide and circuit elections for all judges, setting terms, vacancies, and retention processes.

Second Read and Referred S Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SJR 122

Overview

SJR 122 is a proposed constitutional amendment in Missouri that would change how judges are selected. If approved by voters, the amendment would replace current appointment-after-nomination processes (for many judges) with statewide and circuit-wide elections for all judges. The measure also preserves existing terms for judges already seated or starting January 1, 2027, and sets rules for filling vacancies through elections.

Main purpose and intent

  • Repeal the current system where many judges are chosen by gubernatorial appointment following nominations from nonpartisan commissions (for certain courts in St. Louis and Jackson County, and for some circuit/associate positions).
  • Establish that all judges in Missouri’s Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Circuit Courts, and Associate Circuit Courts would be elected rather than appointed.
  • Create a framework for elections, terms, and vacancies consistent with the new election-based selection process.
  • Allow voters in future to decide whether to maintain or discontinue any nonpartisan appointment arrangements in particular circuits (where that option exists under the amendment).

Key provisions and changes

  • Section 16 (new): Defines the number and residency requirements for associate circuit judges. It explicitly states associate circuit judges shall be elected in each county (replacing any prior appointment process in those offices).
  • Section 19 (new):
    • Sets term lengths: Supreme Court and Court of Appeals judges: 12 years; Circuit Court judges: 6 years; Associate Circuit Judges: 4 years.
    • Establishes election timing: judges shall be elected in general elections by voters of the state or district as applicable.
    • Preserves continuity for incumbents: judges in office as of January 1, 2027, will serve the remainder of their current term, then be subject to election.
    • Clarifies term start/end dates: terms begin January 1 following the election and end the December 31 after the next general election.
  • Section 25(a) (new): Vacancies would be filled by election at the next general election (rather than gubernatorial appointment from a list). This applies to Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Circuit, and Associate Circuit judges.
  • Sections 25(b)–(g) (new): Create a framework for:
    • Possible local votes on whether a circuit (outside St. Louis City and Jackson County) would continue with gubernatorial appointment or switch to election (Section 25(b) would allow a local vote to adopt or discontinue appointment).
    • Details for retention/election procedures, nomination commissions, and the mechanics of elections for judges who come up for retention or election (Sections 25(c)(1)–25(c)(2)).
    • Establishment and operation of judicial commissions (Section 25(d)), including composition rules for appellate and circuit judicial commissions, appointment of members, terms, duties, and procedural rules (promulgated by the Missouri Supreme Court).
    • Financial and ethical provisions (Sections 25(e) and 25(f)):
    • Court expenses for administering Sections 25(a)-(g) would be paid from the state treasury.
    • Judges elected under Sections 25(a)-(g) would be prohibited from political contributions or holding political office.
  • Self-enforcing nature (Section 25(g)): Provisions are designed to be self-enforcing, with limited general-assembly action required.

Who and what would be affected

  • Judges:
    • Supreme Court justices
    • Court of Appeals judges
    • Circuit Court judges
    • Associate Circuit Judges
  • State and local election administrators and officials (for administering judicial elections and any local referenda on appointment vs. election).
  • Nonpartisan judicial commissions (for nominating judges where currently used) would be reorganized or replaced by the new election framework in sections 25(a)-(g).
  • Voters statewide and within judicial circuits/districts who would vote in judicial elections or in local referenda on appointment vs. election.
  • Incumbent judges with terms beginning through 2027 would continue until their current term expires, after which election-based selection would apply.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Effective submission: The amendment would be submitted to Missouri voters at the next general election after the bill’s introduction, or potentially at a special election called by the governor (text references general election timing in November 2026).
  • Transition for incumbents: Judges holding office as of January 1, 2027, or with a term starting then, would complete their current term and then be subject to election under the new system.
  • Vacancies: Vacancies would be filled by election at the next general election rather than by gubernatorial appointment, under Section 25(a).
  • Local adoption: Some circuits outside St. Louis City and Jackson County could be offered a local vote to switch from appointment to election, with thresholds and procedures spelled out (25(b)).
  • Retention and nominations: The plan contemplates a framework for retention elections and the possible use of commissions for initial nominations in some circuits, to be aligned with the new election-based model (Sections 25(c)–25(d)).

Notable context

  • The proposed constitutional change is described as analogous to prior proposals HJR 16 (2017) and HJR 50 (2004).
  • No explicit party designation would appear on judicial ballots under the retention/election framework, consistent with nonpartisan processes described for commissions.
  • The measure emphasizes self-enforcement for its provisions, with limited need for immediate legislative intervention to enforce the new system.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with the current Missouri constitutional provisions to highlight each change’s practical impact.

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

Sign in to ask a question.