最新杏吧原创

The presiding circuit court judge in Cole County, Beetem was first elected to the bench in 2006. That was a different time, not just in Missouri, but in the nation. Donald Trump was barely even a reality TV star back then. Republicans and Democrats rarely accomplished anything important without bipartisan votes, and they didn鈥檛 apologize for it. Truth 鈥� particularly in the courts 鈥� was a valued commodity.

In his 17 years on the bench, Beetem has handled dozens of cases involving the Missouri Constitution and ballot issues. That鈥檚 what happens when you are a judge in the state鈥檚 capital city, where all such legal cases originate. He鈥檚 ruled for and against secretaries of state, in both parties, after they have written proposed ballot summaries as required by law. One side or another often sues over such summaries, seeking a wording advantage. Beetem and other Cole County judges decide those disputes.

But rarely has Beetem had to rule on a case like the one involving a proposed abortion-rights ballot initiative presented to him earlier this year. The ballot initiatives were submitted by a 最新杏吧原创 physician, Dr. Anna Fitz-James. There are six of them in total, each with slight differences. This is a common ballot initiative strategy, with the proposers ultimately picking the version they think has the best chance of being passed by voters.

These ballot initiatives are a response to Missouri鈥檚 total ban against abortions after the U.S. Supreme Court last year overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. Missouri鈥檚 current law makes no exceptions for cases of rape and incest. Since Roe was overturned, there have been seven statewide votes across the country concerning abortion. The folks who back abortion rights have won every time, including in red states like Kansas and Kentucky.

Enter Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft. In what can only be described as a political hack job 鈥� and that is being kind 鈥� he wrote summaries for the ballot initiatives that bore no resemblance to the truth, or accuracy, or fairness. Ashcroft, a Republican, is running for governor. He is trying to position himself as a right-wing culture warrior. But the Missouri Constitution doesn鈥檛 allow him to use his particular political leanings to effectively block access from the state鈥檚 citizens to the ballot initiative process.

That鈥檚 what Beetem ruled back in September. Ashcroft鈥檚 proposed summaries were such a farce, Beetem ruled, that he had to completely rewrite them. It was a stunning rebuke. Ashcroft not only appealed with the backing of fellow pretend-MAGA Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey, he added his name to the case as a lawyer, as if that was going to help.

On Halloween, the Missouri Court of Appeals ripped the MAGA masks off Ashcroft and Bailey and handed them yet another legal defeat, based purely on the law, and their failure to follow it. A three-judge panel ruled unanimously that Beetem鈥檚 rewritten ballot summaries got the law right.

The summaries that Ashcroft wrote, and Bailey defended, were 鈥渋nsufficient,鈥� 鈥渦nfair,鈥� 鈥渋naccurate,鈥� 鈥渁rgumentative,鈥� 鈥減artisan,鈥� 鈥渕isleading,鈥� and a bunch of other words that, when taken together, make it clear that Ashcroft just made up summaries out of thin air, with the intention of killing the initiative.

Ashcroft can be a pro-life, anti-abortion, MAGA warrior all he wants, but that doesn鈥檛 allow him or any other secretary of state to simply lie about an initiative. It鈥檚 up to voters to decide whether they want to maintain Missouri鈥檚 total ban against abortions, or otherwise preserve a woman鈥檚 right to make her own reproductive health decisions.

Here鈥檚 how Ashcroft tried to describe the portion of the proposed initiative petitions:

鈥淒o you want the Missouri Constitution to: allow for dangerous, unregulated, and unrestricted abortions, from conception to live birth, without requiring a medical license or potentially being subject to medical malpractice; nullify longstanding Missouri law protecting the right to life, including but not limited to partial-birth abortion 鈥︹��

And here鈥檚 how Beetem corrected it:

鈥淒o you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to: establish a right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including abortion and contraceptives, with any governmental interference presumed invalid; remove Missouri鈥檚 ban on abortion; allow regulation of reproductive health care to improve or maintain health of patient 鈥︹��

Only Beetem鈥檚 wording came close to the actual words and intent of the initiative petitions.

No matter which side of the issue Missouri voters are on, they deserve the opportunity to vote on a fairly worded ballot initiative, not one that sounds like a partisan campaign mailer.

Ashcroft and Bailey, of course, said they鈥檒l appeal, because telling their voters on social media that they will 鈥渘ever back down鈥� is so much more important in their current world view than actually practicing law or respecting the Missouri Constitution.

It鈥檚 still way too early to know if an abortion-rights initiative will make it to the ballot next year. But Missourians should be grateful that if it does, a plain-spoken Republican judge from Cole County wrote the words that will help them decide the issue.