JEFFERSON CITY — This legislative session saw the divide between the state legislative and judicial branches grow, with calls to change how judges are appointed.

By session’s end, proposed changes to the judicial system never received the votes to advance to final consideration.

In January, Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville, slammed the Missouri Supreme Court for throwing out one of his bills from last session. Brattin aired his complaints at length on the Senate floor Jan. 28 in a filibuster that forced the cancellation of the chief justice’s annual State of the Judiciary address normally delivered to a joint session of the legislature.

“I’m highly upset that they would cancel because their butts needed to be sitting over in this chamber while they see everybody stare them in their face for the crap they pull,” Brattin said on the Senate floor. “Instead, they get to hide behind their little brick building like little kings and queens in their black robes.”

The Supreme Court had just thrown out Senate Bill 22, which was originally intended to restrict state courts’ ability to rewrite ballot language. The court ruled that the law was invalid because it strayed too far from its original purpose. An amendment added during the bill’s progress through the legislature gave power to the attorney general to appeal temporary restraining orders issued by circuit court judges.

“SB 22 as enacted violated its original purpose,” Chief Justice W. Brent Powell wrote in the opinion. “The power section 526.010 grants to the attorney general goes beyond SB 22’s initial purpose related to ballot summaries.”

According to the Missouri State Constitution under Article III, section 23, “no bill shall be so amended in its passage through either house as to change its original purpose.”

The court said the amendment that gave additional powers to the attorney general was fundamental in the bill’s passage. Therefore, the whole bill needed to be thrown out rather than just the amendment.

“While it remains possible the General Assembly would have passed SB 22 without the amendment to section 526.010, this mere possibility is not enough for this Court to save the non-offending provisions of SB 22,” Powell wrote.

Brattin disagreed, writing in his Capitol report the week of Jan. 29 that striking his bill was judicial overreach because it threatened the courts’ ability to change ballot language.

This session, a similar bill was initially approved by the House of Representatives but failed to win Senate approval. House Bill 3146 would double the word limit allowed for ballot measure summaries and disallow the Supreme Court from rewriting ballot language.

Multiple bills have also been introduced this session, seemingly in retaliation for the ruling.

Brattin introduced SB 856, a measure that would move Cole County Circuit Court into the Eastern District Court of Appeals, rather than the western, and make all appeals challenging Missouri laws go through that circuit court. The bill was passed by a Senate committee the same day as Brattin’s floor speech, but never received a Senate floor vote — a necessary step before the House could consider the legislation.

House Joint Resolution 153 and HJR 119, introduced by Rep. Darin Chappell, R-Rogersville, and Rep. Cathy Jo Loy, R-Carthage, would change the way judges are appointed in Missouri.

“(This) House joint resolution is not about weakening the courts,” Loy said in a public hearing for the bill. “It’s about examining whether the current system of selecting our judges best serves Missourians and maintains public confidence in the judiciary.”

The state currently appoints judges for the Supreme Court, appeals courts and selected circuit courts when vacancies occur through “the Missouri Plan,” where a nonpartisan commission gives the governor three qualified candidates to choose from within a 60-day window. If the governor doesn’t choose within that period, the commission appoints one.

The proposed legislation would change that process so that judges are appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Chappell said that the legislation was introduced because of recent poor decision-making from the courts, and that the current Missouri Plan wasn’t truly nonpartisan.

In the bill’s public hearing, it faced criticism from both parties.

“This is a supermajority Republican state, you all control every branch of government,” Rep. Keri Ingle, D-Lee’s Summit, said. “The governor and the commission that he puts together in order to pick a judge panel is comprised of Republicans and because the rulings from the courts aren’t conservative enough for you, you want to throw out the entire plan.”

Rep. Rudy Veit, R-Wardsville, said that the point of the judiciary branch is to protect the minority party from the majority.

HJR 153 passed two House committees but failed to be called up for a vote in the House.

Brattin is running for Congress, where he has also been critical of the balance of power.

“The 3rd branch of government is completely out of control!” Brattin wrote on Facebook. “They feel they are the supreme authority over all things and don’t have to be accountable to anyone!! They will literally rule the constitution to be unconstitutional by the time they are done.”

“I emphatically stand with President Trump and hope the Legislative branch will use the power of the purse to make them squeal like the pigs they are!!!!” he wrote.