In a win for voters, Supreme Court blocks Missouri’s gerrymandered map for midterms

The U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed Friday that Missouri cannot use a gerrymandered congressional map for this year’s midterm elections, closing out a yearlong redistricting legal battle.* 

In a win for pro-voting groups, the Supreme Court’s ruling, which had no noted dissents, comes after Missouri has already sent ballots for the upcoming election to overseas and absentee voters using an older map.

The court in the unsigned opinion blasted Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins (R) for creating unnecessary confusion about which map was in effect for the 2026 elections.

“The Missouri Secretary of State was well aware that conducting the August primary election with the 2025 map carried significant risks,” the court wrote in its decision. “The Secretary nonetheless chose to proceed with the 2025 map for the primary.”

The justices also went on to criticize the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals for incorrectly applying a federal court doctrine about last-minute changes on the eve of an election — an error that only exacerbated the last-minute confusion.

“At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos,” the justices wrote.

Missouri’s seemingly unending redistricting battle came to a head this month after a federal district court and an appeals court ordered Missouri to use the gerrymandered 2025 map, which eliminates a Democratic district in Kansas City, for the upcoming election despite a Missouri Supreme Court ruling that it cannot take effect unless Missouri voters approve the map in a November referendum. 

Missouri used the gerrymandered map for its primaries, which means some voters will now cast ballots in different districts than they were in for the primary.

Missouri voters have already begun casting ballots, and the new ruling affirmed that voting will not be disrupted by the GOP’s redistricting battle. Missouri’s overseas and military voters have already received ballots using the 2022 congressional district lines.

Richard von Glahn — executive director of People Not Politicians, the group leading the anti-gerrymander effort — cast his ballot Tuesday on the first day of the state’s in-person absentee voting period.

Despite the last-minute legal wrangling, the question of which map was in effect was decided three weeks ago. The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously ruled Sept. 3 that the new GOP gerrymander was not in effect, had never been in effect and will not go into effect unless approved by the voters in a referendum. The court went on to take the extraordinary step of holding Hoskins in contempt for refusing to follow its order. 

Missourians have a state constitutional right to veto legislation by putting it to a referendum vote. For months, Missouri’s GOP state leaders insisted that voters didn’t have the authority to veto the congressional map passed by state lawmakers. But the state’s highest court unanimously ruled for the voters, upholding their referendum rights and ordering the state to place the measure on the ballot. 

After that decision, Republican candidates in the election argued to a federal court that Missouri must use the new gerrymander in the general election because it already used that map in the August primary election. 

The Missouri Supreme Court in its Sept. 3 ruling squarely blamed Hoskins for manufacturing that problem himself, calling his arguments “particularly misplaced given the secretary’s delay created the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties of which he complains. In December 2025, a federal district court advised the secretary and the state that, if the referendum petition is sufficient, ‘the new map will be frozen until after the referendum, which could significantly disrupt the 2026 elections.’” 

In its emergency filing with the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, People Not Politicians blasted the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals for issuing an order contradicting not only Missouri’s highest court but also the U.S. Supreme Court’s two orders temporarily blocking the state from using the new map.

“The Eighth Circuit’s order does not merely undermine this Court’s stay order; it requires the district court to issue a permanent injunction granting the exact same relief this Court stayed in the exact same case,” the plaintiffs argued, adding that it appeared to be unprecedented for a federal court of appeals to order a district court to re-issue the same relief that the U.S. Supreme Court had already temporarily blocked.

*The Elias Law Group (ELG) represents the pro-voting parties in this case. ELG Firm Chair Marc Elias is the founder of Democracy Docket.