Missouri House passes new bill that mirrors struck-down 'Let Politicians Lie Act'

Jack Harvel, The Kansas City Star on Mar 11, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

The Missouri House passed a bill on Wednesday giving top state officials more power to rewrite ballot measures less than two months after the Missouri Supreme Court struck down a similar law.

The bill is essentially a copy of last year’s Senate Bill 22, which critics dubbed the “let politicians lie act.” It will now head to the Senate.

The two notable differences between the two pieces of legislation are the removal of a section of the bill allowing the Attorney General to appeal preliminary injunctions issued by the court and a shortened time frame for the Secretary of State to submit revised ballot language on even-numbered election years.

The section that gave the Attorney General the ability to appeal preliminary injunctions was struck down by the courts as unconstitutional.

“The rest of the language that was in Senate Bill 22 is exactly what is in House Bill 3146,” Rep. Josh Simmons, a Washington Republican.

The Missouri Supreme Court struck down the whole law, finding the final legislation changed the original purpose of the bill, making it procedurally unconstitutional. But removing the only materially unconstitutional piece could make a court challenge more difficult.

“It appears to me that Senate Bill 3146 solves the problems that Senate Bill 22 had,” said Chuck Hatfield, an attorney who argued against the law in court.

The bill would strip power away from the Missouri Supreme Court to write ballot summaries if it finds the proposed wording is inaccurate or unfair. Under the bill, a Missouri Circuit Court would assume that authority if the Secretary of State’s third proposed summary remains unfair or prejudicial.

The Missouri Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Senate Bill 22 in January was condemned by many Missouri Republicans. In response, Senate Republicans boycotted the annual State of the Judiciary address, which led to its cancellation.

The language of ballot measures has been hotly contested for several key issues in the state. In several instances, courts have rewritten summaries after finding Secretary of State Denny Hoskins’s proposed language was unfair or prejudiced.

“The last five of five ballot summaries written by the Secretary of State were struck down by courts for being insufficient or unfair. He’s batting 1.000 on being unfair,” Rep. Eric Woods, a Kansas City Democrat, said.

Woods said he believes the legislature is getting in the middle of a separation of powers issue by relegating the authority to rewrite ballot language away from the highest court in the state. He also said that, despite requiring a timeframe on the Secretary of State’s responses, the process could be abused to eat away at time while the courts make their judgments.

“You could run into a situation where these challenges are brought at the very last minute, the clock gets run out and then, according to the text and the language of the bill, if the clock runs out while the challenge is still in play, that challenge is extinguished,” Woods said.

Hatfield said he believes Hoskins is seeing what he can get away with in the first submitted ballot summary. In the new bill, he said the unspecified amount of time given to a court could pose an issue.

“It says the Secretary of State’s got to send in a new statement in seven days, but what if the court takes another 30 days to look at that?” Hatfield said. “It’s a little bit of a flaw in the bill.”

The bill will now head to the Senate, where it could face further changes. When asked if he expects another court challenge, Hatfield said he would need to wait to see if the bill gets amended by the Senate before it reaches the Governor’s desk.