Missouri voters approve Amendment 6, curbing lawmakers’ power to overturn citizen laws

By Jason Hancock 

Missouri Independent

A constitutional amendment that sharply limits the power of state lawmakers to overturn laws enacted directly by voters won overwhelmingly on Tuesday, fundamentally changing the balance of power between citizens and their elected representatives.

Amendment 6, which garnered roughly 60% of the vote on Tuesday, requires at least 80% of both the Missouri House and Senate to agree before lawmakers can propose changes to voter-approved initiatives. Even then, the changes must be approved in another statewide election.

The measure also makes the initiative petition process a fundamental constitutional right, prohibits lawmakers from weakening it and gives courts greater authority to rewrite misleading ballot language.

Its passage represents a significant victory for advocates of direct democracy who spent years accusing Missouri’s Republican-controlled legislature of ignoring election results when voters approved policies lawmakers opposed.

But the amendment’s future could also depend on the courts, with opponents raising questions about whether its protections can constitutionally extend to ballot measures approved more than a decade ago.

The vote comes after a series of confrontations between lawmakers and voters over policies ranging from abortion rights and the minimum wage to marijuana legalization and legislative redistricting.

Amendment 6 would remake balance of power between Missouri voters and lawmakers

Perhaps the clearest example came in 2025.

Six months after voters approved a minimum wage increase and guaranteed paid sick leave for many workers, Republican lawmakers passed legislation repealing the sick leave requirement and eliminating future inflation adjustments to the minimum wage.

Gov. Mike Kehoe signed the bill into law in July 2025, prompting outrage from supporters of the original ballot measure.

Under Amendment 6, lawmakers could no longer make such changes on their own. They would first need overwhelming bipartisan support to put the changes before voters.

The amendment does not automatically restore the sick leave provisions lawmakers repealed. Its restrictions govern legislative action going forward, although they also protect initiatives approved as far back as Jan. 1, 2010.

In 2010, voters approved regulations on puppy mills, only for lawmakers to repeal key provisions the following year. The episode helped convince initiative supporters to pursue constitutional amendments rather than ordinary statutes, which lawmakers could easily change.

The amendment’s reach back to 2010 could become the focus of a new legal battle.

Republicans have argued that applying the new restrictions to previously approved initiatives violates the Missouri Constitution and said he expects the amendment to face a court challenge.

The measure has already survived one major legal fight. In August, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins refused to certify it for the November ballot, arguing that it violated constitutional limits on initiative petitions.

The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously reversed that decision in September, rejecting objections that the proposal violated the constitution’s single-subject and single-article requirements. But the court also said other questions about the amendment’s constitutionality could not be decided before voters approved it.

Those questions could now return to court, including whether its restrictions impermissibly constrain future legislatures or can be applied to initiatives approved before the amendment took effect.

The proposal includes a severability clause intended to preserve the remaining provisions if a court invalidates part of the amendment.

Voter-approved constitutional amendments were already more difficult to undo because changes required another statewide election. But lawmakers needed only a simple majority in each legislative chamber to put a competing amendment on the ballot.

Amendment 6 raises that legislative threshold to 80% for proposals that would change citizen-initiated constitutional amendments, just as it does for voter-approved statutes.

In the 163-member House, that would require 131 votes. In the 34-member Senate, it would take 28.

The amendment also restricts lawmakers from enacting legislation similar in effect to laws rejected through the referendum process without meeting the same requirements.

Supporters argued those protections were necessary to ensure that legislative majorities could not simply disregard decisions voters made at the ballot box.

Opponents warned the proposal went too far.

The Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry opposed Amendment 6, arguing that it would leave lawmakers unable to easily correct unintended consequences of voter-approved laws, particularly those affecting businesses.

Republican lawmakers raised similar objections, arguing that initiative petitions lack the hearings, negotiations and opportunities for revision that accompany legislation.

Those concerns extend to relatively small changes. Even technical corrections to a citizen-approved law could face the amendment’s extraordinary legislative threshold.

But proponents maintained that lawmakers’ ability to rewrite citizen initiatives had become an invitation to disregard the electorate.

The campaign attracted support across party lines, including former Republican U.S. Sen. Jack Danforth, former Democratic Secretary of State Jason Kander, former Republican state Sen. Bob Johnson and the Missouri AFL-CIO.

Organized labor provided substantial financial support, as did other organizations seeking stronger protections for the initiative petition process.

The vote also came just three months after Missourians overwhelmingly rejected a Republican-backed constitutional amendment that would have required citizen initiatives to win a majority statewide and in each of Missouri’s eight congressional districts.

Amendment 6 preserves the existing statewide majority requirement and signature thresholds while prohibiting lawmakers from imposing additional restrictions that weaken citizens’ initiative or referendum powers.

It also requires ballot summaries to be clear, unbiased and accurate, and ensures courts can rewrite language found to be misleading.

Missouri voters established the initiative and referendum process in 1908 to give citizens a way to make or reject laws without relying entirely on the legislature.

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com.