ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Worried about the independence of the court, the attorneys, led by Rush Limbaugh Sr., a prominent Republican lawyer from Cape Girardeau, came up with for selecting judges in Missouri’s largest cities and for its Appeals Court and Supreme Court. The plan, which has since been copied and modified in more than a dozen other states, added merit to the process of selecting the state’s top judges and decreased the amount of politics that could be played in the judiciary.

Since 1940, when voters approved the Missouri Plan in a constitutional amendment, judges have had to apply to become circuit court judges in St. Louis and Kansas City, as well as the appellate courts. Bipartisan commissions of citizens, lawyers and judges examine the applications and name three finalists. The governor makes an appointment from those finalists.

The plan isn’t perfect, but under both Democratic and Republican governors, it has, over the decades, produced the sort of judiciary that Limbaugh and his colleagues had in mind, one that could withstand the pressure of politics.

On Tuesday, the Missouri Plan saved democracy in the Show-Me State when the Missouri Supreme Court majority overturned a decision by Limbaugh’s great grandson, Christopher Limbaugh, now a Circuit Court judge in Cole County. Last week, Limbaugh had ruled Amendment 3, which would ensure women’s reproductive rights in the Missouri Constitution if voters approve it in November, was unconstitutional because it doesn’t specifically describe which state statutes would be invalidated by the amendment.

In an emergency hearing on the last day to get the amendment on the ballot, attorney Chuck Hatfield told the Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday morning that the text of the amendment couldn’t possibly do that, as it is ultimately up to the judges and lawmakers to make that decision after the amendment’s adoption.

“The question is whether the court system is going to honor the will of the people, their reservation of that power, or whether we’re going to allow a small group of people to take that power over an issue of form,� Hatfield, arguing on behalf of Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, told the judges.

The judges, at least a majority of them, agreed with Hatfield.

While Amendment 3 deals with the most divisive of political topics — abortion — the judges’ ruling had nothing to do with that and everything to do with the balance of power between the three co-equal branches of government.

In a Tuesday afternoon ruling — issued about 2:15 p.m. while Limbaugh was on the bench hearing another constitutional challenge to an unrelated Missouri law — the state’s high court ordered Amendment 3 back on the ballot and chided Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft for muddying the waters while the court was deciding the issue. After certifying the amendment for the ballot, Ashcroft changed his mind at the last minute and tried to take the amendment off the ballot, while the Supreme Court case was pending. He can’t do that, the court said.

It’s a tough ruling like this, issued at the last minute under intense political pressure, that underscores the importance of the judicial branch’s independence in government. Under the Missouri Plan, the judges on the appellate courts don’t run in partisan, contested elections, thus shielding them from the vagaries of political winds. They make decisions based on the law, and on Tuesday, they preserved that law, specifically the one that allows Missouri citizens to take issues to the ballot directly.

This was a gutsy call, made by judges who preserved the citizen initiative process, strengthened the separation of powers between the three branches of government, and allowed citizens to have the right to vote on an issue of massive importance.

Missouri’s most extreme abortion ban in the nation hangs in the balance. Regardless of how voters cast their ballots in November, the fact that they will see Amendment 3 at all is, in itself, a triumph for democracy.

The Missouri Plan did its job. Rush Limbaugh Sr. would be proud.