Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 188.205 (2026)

Use of public funds prohibited, when

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  188.205.  Use of public funds prohibited, when. — It shall be unlawful for any public funds to be expended for the purpose of performing or assisting an abortion, not necessary to save the life of the mother, or for the purpose of encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion not necessary to save her life.

­­--------

(L. 1986 H.B. 1596 § 2)

(1987) United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri Central Division, on March 17, 1987, held that section 188.205 was unconstitutional and the state was permanently enjoined from enforcing this provision.  Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 655 F.Supp. 1300 (W.D. Mo.).

(1988) United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that Missouri's ban on expenditure of public funds for purpose of performing or assisting abortions is constitutional but the portion of the section which prohibits the use of public funds for encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion is void for vagueness.  Reproductive Health Services v. William L. Webster, 851 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir.).

(1989)  Where state interpretation of statute was that it was not directed at primary conduct of physicians or health care providers but was simply instruction to state's fiscal officers not to allocate public funds for abortion counseling, state-employed health professionals and private nonprofit corporations providing abortion services were no longer adversely affected by section and there was no longer case or controversy before a court.  Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 109 S.Ct. 3040.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1987–2023 · leading case: Reproductive Health Servs. v. Webster, 662 F. Supp. 407 (W.D. Mo. 1987).
Reproductive Health Servs. v. Webster, 662 F. Supp. 407 (W.D. Mo. 1987). · cites it 15× “” Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 188.205, 188.-210, 188.215.”
Reproductive Health Servs. v. Webster, 655 F. Supp. 1300 (W.D. Mo. 1987). · cites it 15× “” Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 188.205, 188.-210, 188.215.”
Shipley v. Cates, 200 S.W.3d 529 (Mo. 2006). · cites it 6× “[2] Section 188.205, RSMo 2000, prohibits state funds for abortions.”
Dr. Anna Fitz-James v. John R. Ashcroft, Missouri Sec'y of State (Mo. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “Fitz-James conceded at trial that the nondiscrimination provision in four of the initiatives (2024-078, 2024-080, 2024-082, and 2024-086) would render section 188.205 susceptible to challenge.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.