JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – After a Missouri Supreme Court ruling late last week, the proposed initiative petition to restore abortion rights hits another hurdle. 

A Cole County judge dismissed a lawsuit Wednesday, accusing Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft of writing misleading ballot language. But the case isn’t over.

Instead, both parties agreed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Missouri jumped the gun by filing the suit before the ballot summer was certified. 

“The cases may become right, they likely will become right, but they were not then, and they are not now,” Assistant Attorney General Jason Lewis said in court Wednesday. 

Another logjam for supporters looking to restore abortion rights in Missouri. 

“It’s important to consider there is a constitutional right at stake and as the Supreme Court has said many times, every delay infringes somewhat on that right,” attorney for the ACLU Tony Rothert said. 

Just days after the Missouri Supreme Court ruled against Attorney General Andrew Bailey for holding up the initiative petition process, the proposed constitutional amendments are once again before a judge. 

“I’m going to sustain the motion to dismiss on the issue of ripeness,” Cole County Judge Jon Beetem said. 

Beetem telling the ACLU of Missouri, they acted too soon and to refile the lawsuits once Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft certifies the ballot language. 

Back in March, 11 abortion rights petitions were filed with the Secretary of State’s office to roll back the state’s abortion ban. In April, the amendments hit a snag when the attorney general disagreed with the state auditor’s fiscal note, meaning how much it would cost the state if approved by voters. Then, a lawsuit was filed against the state for holding up the constitutional amendments, as supporters waited for the ballot summary to be released.

Bailey estimated the referendums to cost roughly $12.5 billion saying he believed the state could lose Medicaid funding or lost revenue from people who wouldn’t be born. Compared to Fitzpatrick’s estimate for $51,000.

Last month, Beetem ruled Bailey must approve the auditor’s estimate within 24 hours, but the attorney general appealed the ruling, sending the case to the state’s highest court.

Under state law, the attorney general is tasked with approving the legal content and form of a proposed initiative petition. The state auditor is required to come up with the cost and the summary for the amendment.

Under this ruling from the Missouri Supreme Court, Bailey had until 1 p.m. Friday to certify the fiscal note summary and then Ashcroft had until 5 p.m. Wednesday to certify the ballot summary. 

“It appears subsequent to the Supreme Court, everybody has moved within the time requirements,” Beetem said Wednesday. In the summary the ACLU is calling misleading, Ashcroft asks voters if they want to: 

allow for dangerous, unregulated, and unrestricted abortions, from conception to live birth, without requiring a medical license or potentially being subject to medical malpractice; 

nullify longstanding Missouri law protecting the right to life, including but not limited to partial-birth abortion; 

allow for laws to be enacted regulating abortion procedures after 24 weeks, while guaranteeing the right of any woman, including a minor, to end the life of their unborn child at any time; and 

require the government not to discriminate against persons providing or obtaining an abortion, potentially including tax-payer funding?

In a statement Wednesday afternoon, Ashcroft said he applauds the court for “dismissing the frivolous lawsuits that were filed prior to the language being certified.”

The ACLU proposed its own ballot language for the petition which asked voters to “establish the right to reproductive freedom that includes the right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care and respectful birthing conditions.”

The ACLU filed an amended complaint Thursday, sending the case back to court. Both parties are set to meet for a status hearing on Aug. 3.