The Missouri Plan (originally the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan, also known as the merit plan, or some variation) is a method for the selection of judges. It originated in Missouri in 1940 and has been adopted by many states of the United States. Similar methods are used in some other countries.
Under the plan, a non-partisan commission reviews candidates for a judicial vacancy. The commission then sends to the governor a list of candidates considered best qualified. The governor then has sixty days to select a candidate from the list. If the governor does not make a selection within sixty days, the commission makes the selection.
At the next general election after the completion of one year's service, the judge must stand in a retention election. If a majority votes against retention, the judge is removed from office, and the process starts anew. Otherwise, the judge serves out a full term.
As of 2016, 38 states have a form of merit-based selection and retention method for some or all judges. As of 2024, fourteen states use the Missouri/Merit selection method to screen and appoint all candidates for the state courts of last resort. Eight states have commissions which fill interim vacancies on the highest courts.
Support for merit selection increased due to the perceived corruption of urban political bosses. Missouri voters adopted the system by initiative petition in November 1940 after several very contentious judicial elections, which were heavily influenced by the political machine of Tom Pendergast. Similarly, the voters in Clay and Platte counties (parts of Kansas City), St. Louis county, and Greene County (Springfield) have elected to appoint such judges under the nonpartisan system. After Missouri adopted this method for selecting judges, several other states adopted it, either in full or in part.
The Missouri Non-Partisan Court Plan has served as a model for thirty-four other states that use merit selection to fill some or all judicial vacancies. 23 states use the method or a variant for the state supreme court.
A research on the spread of the Missouri plan, using statistical analysis, has found that the most reform-prone states were those that faced a growing urban and industrial population. The authors present that these states were not the most reform-oriented at the time by presenting the simple fact that, although the plan originated in Missouri in 1940, no other state adopted it until 1958. According to their analysis, this wave of adoption coincided closely with the period leading up to and following legislative reapportionment in the 1960s and early 1970s, prompted in part by the Supreme Court’s decision in Baker v. Carr (1962). In this case, the Supreme Court, in a 6-2 decision, decided that state legislative reapportionment questions were justiciable, and the Courts can intervene if appropriate legal reapportionment measures have not been taken. During this period, rural legislators in states with rapidly growing urban populations faced the prospect of losing long-standing overrepresentation in state legislatures. The adoption of the Missouri Plan served as a strategic response to these anticipated power shifts, allowing rural interests to limit the influence of urban areas in the selection of judges who would later oversee reapportionment disputes. This incentive experienced a decline once the reapportionment was complete.
Advantages of the Missouri plan
Emphasis on judicial qualifications
When it comes to advantages, the pre-appointment screening process, conducted by judicial nominating commissions, emphasizes competence and professional reputation before political affiliations. For the supporters, this allows the governor of the state not to receive a politically charged individual, and it increases the likelihood that judges are selected based on merit and fitness for office, rather than name recognition or political affiliation. Examples include the City of Saint Louis, where Republican candidates have faced electoral disadvantages; however, through the nonpartisan plan, the judgeships have been given to independents and republicans alike who passed through the vetting process. The highest recorded score in the article for this judicial method of selection was in 2007, with 64.4, compared to other selection methods.
Professor Stephen Ware of the University of Kansas wrote about the Missouri Plan, "As the bar is an elite segment of society, states that give lawyers more power than their fellow citizens are rightly described as elitist." Ware continued: