Authors: Alfred A. Lindseth and Eric A. Hanushek
State High Court & Judicial Nominating Commission | Composition & Terms of Judicial Nominating Commission | Judicial Selection Process | Legal Authority |
---|---|---|---|
Terms: 6 years (staggered, except for the Chair) |
General
Interim Vacancies
|

Percentage of Lawyers on the Nominating Commission

Who Selects the Nominating Commissioners?
Latest News
- Abortions to resume in Missouri after judge halts licensing requirements - STLPR
- Abortion Services to Restart in Missouri After Court Ruling - newslooks.com
- Missouri judge clears path for abortions in KC, blocking ‘discriminatory’ clinic rules - Kansas City Star
- Supreme Court considers disciplinary action for bankruptcy attorneys over fee practices - Missouri Lawyers Media
- States Take Action Against DEI – Missouri v. Starbucks - The National Law Review
- Missouri House bill targets Republican judge in Cole County over controversial rulings - News From The States
- McPherson, Price Named to Missouri Lawyers Weekly 2025 Appellate Law Power List - Armstrong Teasdale LLP
- Missouri Attorney General sues Starbucks for race-and-sex-based discrimination - kttn
- Missouri Supreme Court case could set precedent on transgender student use of bathrooms - Columbia Daily Tribune
- Missouri Supreme Court rules in case challenging lifetime monitoring of sex offender - Missourinet.com
Scholarship & White Papers
Public Opinion Research
-
Proposals to Amend the Judicial Appointment Process
St. Louis Lawyers Chapter, 27 April 2007 – Event Audio
Featuring: Douglas Copeland, William G. Eckhardt, William J. Placke, Jo Mannies
-
Debating the Role of the Chief Justice in Judicial Selection
St. Louis Lawyers Chapter, 11 March 2008 – Event Audio
Featuring: William Placke, Woody Cozad, Tom Walsh, Randy Scherr, Samuel Hais
-
Two Perspectives on Missouri’s Non Partisan Court Plan
Kansas City Lawyers Chapter, 14 November 2007 – Event Video
Featuring: David Oliver, William Placke
Media & Commentary
-
Declining to Follow Its Neighbor Missouri, the Kansas Supreme Court Holds Noneconomic Damages Cap in Medical Malpractice Cases Constitutional
The Kansas Supreme Court, in Miller v. Johnson,1 recently upheld Kansas’ statutory cap on non-economic damages in personal injury cases, including medical malpractice cases, as constitutional. Specifically, the Kansas Supreme Court held the cap, set forth in K.S.A. 60-19a02, does not violate Sections 5 and 18 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights providing a right to a jury trial and a right to damages, respectively. This decision is in contrast to its neighboring state’s supreme court, which recently declared a statutory cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases unconstitutional for violation of the right to a jury trial.2
-
Missouri Supreme Court Overrules 20 Years of Precedent in Holding Noneconomic Damages Cap Unconstitutional
Overruling its own twenty-year precedent in Adams By and Through Adams v. Children’s Mercy Hospital1 (Adams), the Missouri Supreme Court, in a four-to-three decision, held in Watts v. Lester E. Cox Medical Centers (Watts) that the cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases in Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.210, passed as part of the comprehensive tort reform passed by the Missouri Legislature in 2005, violates article I, section 22(a) of the Missouri Constitution’s right to trial by jury.2 The Missouri Supreme Court also held that Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.220 grants a trial judge authority to determine the manner by which future damages shall be paid, including what amount shall be paid in future installments.3