Missouri redistricting fight erupts again as referendum backers ask judge to pause order, appeal to 8th Circuit

Missouri’s congressional redistricting fight escalated again Tuesday night as opponents of the state’s Trump-backed GOP gerrymander asked a federal judge to immediately pause his order requiring the map to be used in November.

Gerrymander foes also took the fight to a federal appeals court and the state Supreme Court.

People Not Politicians and its executive director Richard von Glahn filed an emergency request hours after Chief U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark ordered Missouri officials to use House Bill 1 (HB 1), the Republican-drawn congressional map, for the 2026 midterms.

The referendum proponents also appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

And they asked the state Supreme Court to hold Secretary of State Denny Hoskins (R) in contempt for violating the court’s September 3 order barring it from using the gerrymandered map. Hours later, the high court issued an order giving Hoskins until noon CT Wednesday to explain why he should not be held in contempt. The order cited an email sent by Hoskins Tuesday evening directing election officials to use the gerrymandered map.

Their emergency filing argues that Clark’s order has put Missouri election officials in an “impossible position” because it directly conflicts with the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling last week that HB 1 “is not the law and has never been the law.”

The state high court barred Hoskins from using the map unless voters approve it in November. Clark’s order, by contrast, prohibits Hoskins from using any congressional map other than HB 1.

“If they use the HB 1 map, they are in contempt of the Missouri Supreme Court; if they use any other map, they are in contempt of the federal district court,” the referendum backers wrote. 

They are asking Clark for an immediate administrative pause and, after that, a longer pause while their appeal proceeds. 

The filing also raises a procedural attack on Clark’s ruling, arguing that he could not issue the temporary restraining order on his own.

Under federal law, they contend, a challenge involving the constitutionality of congressional apportionment must be heard by a three-judge district court. Clark did not convene such a panel before issuing his order. 

They further argue that the federal lawsuit is effectively an improper attempt to appeal the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision through a lower federal court, invoking the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, the Anti-Injunction Act and federal abstention principles. 

The emergency request came after an extraordinary day of conflicting court rulings.

Earlier Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Hoskins’ separate request* to pause the Missouri Supreme Court ruling. Hours later, Clark granted a temporary restraining order in a parallel lawsuit brought by Republican candidates and voters, reviving HB 1 for the November election.

Clark’s order lasts 14 days while the district court considers whether to issue longer-lasting relief. The appeal means the 8th Circuit could now be asked to intervene on an emergency basis as the district court proceedings continue.

In their appeal to the 8th circuit, the referendum backers said Kavanaugh denied Missouri’s Supreme Court application around 4:30 p.m. and Clark issued his conflicting TRO at 4:58 p.m.

They argued that Hoskins had already begun complying with the Missouri Supreme Court’s order, sending certification to local election authorities and directing clerks to finalize ballots under the 2022 map. That, they said, meant the 2022 map was already the “status quo on the ground” when Clark intervened.

In his separate motion to the state Supreme Court, Von Glahn argued that Clark’s federal order does not actually direct Hoskins to use HB 1; instead, it bars him from using any other map. On that basis, he contended that Hoskins remains bound by the Missouri Supreme Court’s separate order prohibiting use of HB 1. 

The filing also challenged Attorney General Catherine Hanaway’s assertion that Clark’s ruling “binds the state” to use the new map, arguing that a federal district court cannot overrule the Missouri Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law. Von Glahn asked the state justices to order Hoskins to show cause and make clear that, absent contrary relief from the U.S. Supreme Court, he must continue complying with their injunction.

*The Elias Law Group (ELG) represented the challengers to the gerrymander in the U.S. Supreme Court. ELG Firm Chair Marc Elias is the founder of Democracy Docket.

This story has been updated.