On February 1, 2008, the Missouri Bar published its official positions on pending legislation (original documents available here). Two of the three pending resolutions attempt to reform the Missouri Plan, which is Missouri's current system of selecting judges and justices.

The Missouri Bar Executive Committee meets to review pending legislation. The Executive Committee consists of the Bar's officers and three members elected by the Board of Governors. This year's members include:

• Charlie J. Harris, Jr., President
• Thomas M. Burke, President-Elect
• H.A. "Skip" Walther, Vice-President
• C. Ronald Baird, Immediate Past-President
• John S. Johnston
• W. Edward Reeves
• Eric J. Wulff

House Joint Resolution 41 (summary) proposes to disallow state courts from imposing or ordering increased taxes, licenses or fees, except when expressly authorized by the General Assembly or the voters. It would further disallow state courts from ordering the Missouri government to "appropriate or expend public funds except as expressly approved by legislation" or popular vote.

The Bar opposes House Joint Resolution 41 because it removes jurisdiction "reserved to the judiciary and erodes separation of powers."

House Joint Resolution 49 (summary) proposes a constitutional amendment that would increase the number of non-Missouri Bar, Governor-appointed citizens serving on the Appellate Judicial Commission from three to five citizens.

The Bar opposes House Joint Resolution 49 because it "politicizes the process" without improving it.

House Joint Resolution 52 (summary) abolishes the nonpartisan Judicial Commission and establishes a bi-partisan judicial merit selection commission, to be known as the Merit Commission, for each judicial entity including the Supreme Court, each court of appeals, and each circuit court of the City of St. Louis and the counties of Clay, Jackson, Platte, and St. Louis. Selected provisions include:

• Requiring a judicial nominee to be subject to senate confirmation; and
• Eliminating the Missouri Bar's input into the Appellate Judicial Nominating Commission.

The Bar opposes the Joint Resolution, arguing that it politicizes the process, renders it more inefficient, and deprives the public of the Missouri Bar's "knowledge and expertise."