Missouri's Judicial Manipulation: A Dangerous Assault on Judicial Independence

The Facts: A Partisan Reshuffling of Missouri’s Judicial System

Missouri Republicans, led by state Senator Rick Brattin, are advancing legislation that would fundamentally alter how legal challenges are handled within the state’s judicial system. The proposed changes would move most high-profile legal fights—including ballot initiative challenges—from the Western District Court of Appeals to the Eastern District. Additionally, the legislation would mandate that any lawsuits challenging the validity of Missouri statutes, regulations, or constitutional provisions be tried exclusively in Cole County.

Proponents of the legislation, including lobbyist Sam Lee of Campaign Life Missouri and Susan Klein of Missouri Right to Life, frame these changes as matters of “judicial efficiency” and “common sense government efficiency.” Senator Brattin argues that the Eastern District is “more robust” with more judges and solicitors general. The Eastern District currently has 14 judges handling approximately half of Missouri’s appellate caseload, while the Western District has 11 judges handling about 40% of appeals.

The Context: A Pattern of Political Frustration

The timing and motivation behind this legislation raise serious questions about its true purpose. The move comes after years of frustration among Republicans and anti-abortion advocates with decisions from the Western District Court of Appeals. Sam Lee explicitly stated that in their experience with the Western District, “we think they’ve been unfair, we think they’ve been biased, and there are a lot of people who agree with us on that.”

The Western District has issued several significant rulings that have displeased conservative interests. In 2023, the court ruled that then-Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft’s ballot titles for proposed abortion rights amendments were “replete with politically partisan language.” Last fall, the court rejected a request by the attorney general’s office to reinstate several restrictions on abortion. In December, it rewrote the ballot language for a proposed constitutional amendment reinstating Missouri’s abortion ban.

The political composition of the courts adds another layer to this discussion. In the Western District, seven judges were appointed by Democratic governors and four by Republicans. The Eastern District has a narrower split, with eight judges appointed by Republicans and six by Democrats. This political dimension cannot be ignored when evaluating the motivations behind this legislative effort.

The Dangerous Precedent of Outcome-Based Judicial Reform

This attempted judicial reshuffling represents one of the most dangerous assaults on judicial independence I’ve witnessed in recent state politics. When politicians begin shopping for favorable court venues based on desired outcomes rather than principles of justice and efficiency, they undermine the very foundation of our legal system.

The rhetoric surrounding this legislation reveals its true nature. This isn’t about caseload distribution or judicial efficiency—it’s about political outcomes. The proponents have been remarkably transparent about their dissatisfaction with rulings that didn’t align with their political agenda. Sam Lee’s admission that the anti-abortion movement is now “watching more closely” speaks volumes about the motivation behind this effort.

What makes this particularly alarming is the precedent it sets. If Missouri Republicans succeed in manipulating the judicial system to achieve favorable outcomes, what prevents other political groups from doing the same when they gain power? This creates a dangerous cycle where the judicial system becomes merely an extension of political power rather than an independent check on it.

The Threat to Citizen Access and Judicial Expertise

The legislation would create significant barriers for ordinary citizens seeking to challenge state laws. As Dave Roland of the Freedom Center of Missouri noted, “If the burden of travel needs to fall on anyone, it makes more sense for it to fall on state officials than on ordinary citizens.” Forcing all constitutional challenges to be filed in Cole County disproportionately affects citizens who may lack the resources to travel and litigate far from their communities.

Chuck Hatfield, a longtime Jefferson City attorney, raised concerns about the loss of institutional knowledge that would result from moving cases away from Western District judges with experience handling constitutional cases. He estimated it could take years for the Eastern District to build up comparable expertise. This professional perspective highlights how this politically motivated change would actually decrease judicial efficiency and expertise.

The legislation would also dramatically shift workload, including approximately 25,000 pending lawsuits against Monsanto over cancer allegations, to the Eastern District. This massive redistribution appears driven by political considerations rather than thoughtful judicial administration.

The Assault on Nonpartisan Justice

Perhaps most disturbingly, this effort represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the judicial role in a constitutional democracy. Judges emphasize their nonpartisan role, but this legislation treats them as political actors whose decisions should be managed through geographic manipulation.

The attempt to move cases from Jackson County, where judges are appointed through a nonpartisan process, to Cole County, where judges run in partisan elections, reveals the true motivation: creating a more politically favorable environment for certain outcomes.

This approach threatens the integrity of Missouri’s entire judicial system. When citizens perceive that justice depends on which courtroom they enter rather than the merits of their case, faith in the entire system erodes. That erosion of trust represents a grave danger to the rule of law itself.

The Broader Implications for Democratic Norms

This Missouri situation reflects a broader national trend where political actors, frustrated with independent judicial decisions, seek to manipulate judicial systems to achieve preferred outcomes. Such efforts, whether at the state or federal level, represent a clear and present danger to American democracy.

The judicial branch exists as a check on political power—a protection against the tyranny of the majority. When politicians attempt to neuter this check because it occasionally rules against their interests, they attack the very separation of powers that protects our liberties.

Missourians should be deeply concerned about this power grab. The legislation passed through the Senate General Laws committee on a party-line vote, demonstrating that this is fundamentally a partisan effort rather than a genuine reform initiative.

Conclusion: Defending Judicial Independence

As someone deeply committed to democratic principles and the rule of law, I view this Missouri legislation as profoundly dangerous. It represents the kind of judicial manipulation that should alarm every citizen regardless of political affiliation.

The proper response to unfavorable judicial decisions is not to shop for different courts but to either appeal those decisions through proper channels or work to change laws through the legislative process. The judicial system must remain independent and free from political manipulation.

Missouri’s Republicans should abandon this dangerous effort to manipulate the judicial system. Instead, they should respect the independence of the judiciary and work within the proper bounds of our constitutional system. The people of Missouri deserve a justice system that operates based on law and principle, not political convenience and preferred outcomes.

The fight for judicial independence is ultimately a fight for democracy itself. When we allow politicians to manipulate the courts for political gain, we surrender one of our most fundamental protections against government overreach. Missourians—and all Americans—must stand against this dangerous precedent before it spreads and further erodes our democratic foundations.