City of St. Louis v. State of Missouri

Summary

The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed most of the judgment sustaining judgment on the pleadings against challenges to Senate Bill No. 26, but reversed as to the alleged unfunded mandate under the Hancock Amendment and remanded for further proceedings. The Court held that the pleadings sufficiently alleged new or increased activities and more-than-de-minimis increased costs, and that the claim was ripe and properly brought by the taxpayer plaintiff. It rejected the challenges based on original purpose, additional duties imposed on charter-city officers, public funds, and equal protection, and declined to reach the substantial-compliance issue.