Missouri voters reject court fees for law enforcement pensions, preserving access to justice and preventing potential police profit motives.
At a Glance
- Amendment 6, proposing to fund law enforcement pensions through court fees, was rejected by Missouri voters
- The amendment aimed to reinstate a $3 court fee previously struck down as unconstitutional
- Opponents argued the fee could lead to “policing for profit” and compromise public safety
- The rejection calls for lawmakers to develop sustainable funding solutions for law enforcement pensions
Voters Stand Firm Against Court Fee Funding for Law Enforcement
Missouri voters have decisively rejected Amendment 6, a proposal that sought to change the state constitution to allow court fees to fund law enforcement salaries and retirement benefits. The amendment aimed to reinstate a $3 court fee to support the Missouri Sheriffs’ Retirement System, which was previously struck down by the Missouri Supreme Court in 2021 as unconstitutional.
The court’s decision was based on Article I, Section 14 of the Missouri Constitution, which ensures open access to justice without unreasonable charges. Amendment 6 would have effectively nullified this ruling by redefining the administration of justice to include levying court fees for law enforcement funding.
Mo. amendment to reinstate court fees that funded sheriffs’ pensions fails https://t.co/aurEvGAAe8
— Police1 (@PoliceOne) November 6, 2024
Implications for Law Enforcement Funding and Public Safety
The rejection of Amendment 6 is being hailed as a victory for liberty by some, as it prevents the creation of perverse incentives that could tie pension contributions to criminal justice activities. Evidence suggests that law enforcement practices can be influenced by budgetary concerns, potentially compromising public safety.
This concern is not unfounded. The Department of Justice’s investigation into the Ferguson Police Department highlighted issues with revenue-focused law enforcement practices, noting that such practices “compromised the institutional character of Ferguson’s police department, contributing to a pattern of unconstitutional policing, and has also shaped its municipal court, leading to procedures that raise due process concerns and inflict unnecessary harm on members of the Ferguson community.”
The Need for Sustainable Funding Solutions
While proponents of Amendment 6 expressed concerns about the solvency of the Sheriffs’ Retirement System, relying on court fees for pension liabilities is widely viewed as poor public finance practice. The rejection of the amendment calls for lawmakers to reprioritize funding and develop sustainable solutions.
Governor Mike Parson’s administration has proposed a temporary $5 million appropriation to cover pension contributions while a long-term solution is developed. This approach aligns with the principle that law enforcement and courts should be funded through legislative appropriations, not unstable court fees.
