Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 3.066 (2026)

Statutes declared unconstitutional on procedural grounds, duties of the revisor

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  3.066.  Statutes declared unconstitutional on procedural grounds, duties of the revisor — statute enjoined, revisor's duty to publish footnote. — 1.  When the Missouri supreme court or a federal court with competent jurisdiction makes a final ruling that a bill enacted by the Missouri general assembly or a Missouri state statute or any portion of a Missouri state statute contained in a bill enacted by the Missouri general assembly is unconstitutional on procedural grounds, the Missouri revisor of statutes shall:

  (1)  For a repealed statute or an amended statute contained in such bill, reprint the statute as it existed in the revised statutes of Missouri prior to the enactment of the bill that the court declared unconstitutional;

  (2)  For a new statute contained in such bill, remove the new statute from the revised statutes of Missouri, if necessary, and publish only a footnote calling attention to the ruling of the court explaining the reason for the removal of such statute from the revised statutes of Missouri.

  2.  When a state or federal court with competent jurisdiction issues a permanent order enjoining a bill enacted by the Missouri general assembly or a Missouri state statute or any portion of a Missouri state statute contained in a bill enacted by the Missouri general assembly as unconstitutional on procedural grounds, the Missouri attorney general shall notify the Missouri revisor of statutes of any such order and the Missouri revisor of statutes shall publish a footnote to each affected section calling attention to the ruling of the court on any official website of the committee on legislative research.  Such footnote shall remain until such time as a final ruling is made by the Missouri supreme court or a federal court with competent jurisdiction, and at such time, the Missouri revisor shall remove such footnote and, if necessary, shall update such website in like manner as provided in subsection 1 of this section.

­­--------

(L. 2004 S.B. 884 § 3.075, A.L. 2014 S.B. 621 merged with S.B. 643)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2014–2014 · leading case: John T. Impey v. Missouri Ethics Comm'n, 442 S.W.3d 42 (Mo. 2014).
John T. Impey v. Missouri Ethics Comm'n, 442 S.W.3d 42 (Mo. 2014). · cites it 3× “See Section 3.066, RSMo Supp. 2013. 2 . Section 130.”
John T. Impey v. Missouri Ethics Comm'n, No. SC93698 (Mo. June 24, 2014). · cites it 3× “See Section 3.066, RSMo Supp. 2013. that § 105.”
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.