SJR 93 is a proposed Missouri constitutional amendment that would be submitted to voters at the 2026 general election, or at a special election called by the governor. The resolution would repeal and replace Section 13 of Article I of the Missouri Constitution, which currently bars ex post facto laws and laws that are retrospective in operation. Under the new language, retrospective laws would remain generally prohibited, but an exception would be created for civil claims involving the sexual abuse of a child under 18, including claims based on tortious conduct that caused or contributed to that abuse.
The measure is aimed at allowing the General Assembly to enact laws that revive or extend civil remedies for childhood sexual abuse claims, even if those laws would otherwise be considered retrospective. The ballot summary language frames the proposal as a child-protection amendment and asks voters whether the constitution should be changed to permit retrospective laws for civil childhood sexual abuse claims.
Impact
If approved, the amendment would alter Missouri constitutional law by carving out a specific exception to the state’s prohibition on retrospective laws. That change would give lawmakers authority to pass legislation affecting previously time-barred or otherwise retroactively affected civil claims arising from childhood sexual abuse, potentially expanding access to the courts for survivors and increasing exposure for alleged abusers and related tort defendants. It would not itself create a cause of action, but it would remove a constitutional barrier that could otherwise limit such legislation.
Sentiment
The available context suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill’s purpose, with the resolution presented as a child-protection measure. The ballot language is framed in supportive terms, emphasizing protection of children and civil remedies for abuse survivors. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no evidence of formal opposition or support beyond the bill’s text and summary language.
Contention
The main point of contention is the constitutional exception itself: Missouri’s constitution broadly prohibits retrospective laws, and SJR 93 would create a narrow carveout for childhood sexual abuse civil claims. Supporters are likely to view this as necessary to help survivors pursue justice despite delayed disclosure, while critics may argue it weakens constitutional protections against retroactive legislation and could expose defendants to revived liability. The tension is between expanding remedies for abuse survivors and preserving the state’s general ban on retroactive laws.