Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
In a September 25 emergency order, the U.S. Supreme Court said lower courts should not require Missouri to use its 2025 congressional map in November. Republican officials wanted the primary map kept; the Missouri Supreme Court and map opponents said the 2022 map governs.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
Missouri lawmakers passed a new congressional map, House Bill 1, in September 2025, and the State used it in the August 4, 2026 primary. On September 3, 2026, the Supreme Court of Missouri ruled unanimously that a referendum petition kept the map from taking effect and that the 2022 map remains in force for the November general election. Gov. Mike Kehoe, Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins and President Donald Trump said in early September that the primary map should be used in November, and the Eighth Circuit held on September 21 that using the 2022 map violates the U.S. Constitution. People Not Politicians, the Campaign Legal Center and the ACLU argued that Missouri law makes the 2022 map the only valid map and that ballots had been mailed under it. On September 25, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court, in an unsigned per curiam order that records no dissent, stayed the federal injunctions, said that under state law the 2022 map must be used, and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election. Kehoe called that decision disappointing and said Missouri will follow the order.
Read the full background
The fixed reference point for classification in this case is the use of Missouri's 2025 congressional map (House Bill 1) in the November 3, 2026 general election. Responses are recorded against that specific question, not against mid-decade redistricting in general, the merits of Proposition A, or the earlier lawsuits over how the map was drawn. A response that argues the 2025 map should be used in the general election is recorded as defending that use, and a response that argues it should not be used is recorded as condemning it. Court rulings are recorded by what they order on that question.
The Missouri Senate gave final approval to the map on September 12, 2025 (opens in a new tab), after the legislature reconvened at the urging of President Donald Trump, according to the Missouri Independent. The Eighth Circuit (opens in a new tab) recorded that Gov. Mike Kehoe signed it on September 28, 2025, and that People Not Politicians submitted, by its own count, more than 300,000 referendum signatures on December 9, 2025. Secretary of State Denny Hoskins declared the referendum petition unconstitutional on August 4, 2026 (opens in a new tab), the day of the primary, and the Missouri Independent reported (opens in a new tab) that the primary was held in the boundaries drawn in 2025.
On September 3, 2026, the Supreme Court of Missouri (opens in a new tab) ruled unanimously that the referendum petition was "legal, sufficient, and timely," that House Bill 1 "is not the law and has never been the law," and that the 2022 map "remains in full force and effect for the November 2026 general election." Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said her office would seek relief from the U.S. Supreme Court, and Hoskins wrote in a news release (opens in a new tab) that no court has ever rejected a congressional map that had already been used in an election.
Rep. Bob Onder, Sen. Rick Brattin and two voters sued in federal court on September 4, the Missouri Independent reported (opens in a new tab). Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Hoskins's application to stay the state ruling on September 8, and Chief Judge Stephen Clark (opens in a new tab) issued an order that day requiring the 2025 map. The U.S. Supreme Court stayed that order on September 10 (opens in a new tab). On September 21 (opens in a new tab), the Eighth Circuit held that the Constitution does not permit Missouri to use a different congressional map in the general election than it used in the primary, and Judge Stras, concurring in part and dissenting in part, wrote that he would dismiss the appeal for lack of standing.
On September 25, the Supreme Court, in an unsigned per curiam order (opens in a new tab), stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions and wrote that "ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos." On the merits, the order says the Court's precedents have not previously stated that Article I, Section 2 requires a state to use the primary election map in a general election, and that "it suffices that the merits are not entirely clearcut." The September 10 stay also remains in effect until the Court lifts it, and the Missouri Independent reported that the deadline to seek certiorari is December 21.
Supporters of using the 2025 map argued that voters had nominated candidates under it and that changing maps between the primary and general elections was unprecedented or unjust. Opponents argued that Missouri law makes the 2022 map the only valid map and that ballots were already being mailed and cast under it. In its September 23 brief (opens in a new tab), the Missouri Attorney General's Office wrote that the State believes voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest, and also that Missouri will not be able to run an orderly 2026 general election regardless of what the Court does.
Missouri voters will decide Proposition A, the referendum on House Bill 1, on November 3. A yes vote would enact the bill and a no vote would reject it, according to the Missouri Independent (opens in a new tab). On September 25, Gov. Kehoe said in an official statement (opens in a new tab) that it is disappointing that the November election will use a different map than the primary and that Missouri will follow the Court's order. As of the evening of September 25, 2026, we could not locate a public response to the order from Attorney General Hanaway, Secretary Hoskins or President Trump.
People in this case
Denny HoskinsDirectly involved
Bob OnderDirectly involved
Mike KehoeDirectly involved
Catherine HanawayDirectly involved
Timeline
22 timeline entries on this page. Dates: September 9, 2025 to October 29, 2026
September 2025
Trump urges the Missouri Senate to pass the congressional map
The Missouri Independent reported that President Donald Trump wrote on social media that the Missouri Senate should pass the House-approved congressional map immediately and unchanged.
[01]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
The Missouri Senate must pass this Map now, AS IS
Report that President Donald Trump demanded on social media on Tuesday, September 9, 2025 that the Missouri Senate pass the House-approved congressional map.
After hearing from Trump, Missouri GOP muscle gerrymandered map forward in state Senate · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 10, 2025Missouri lawmakers pass the 2025 congressional map
Incident
The Missouri Senate voted 21-11 to give final approval to House Bill 1, which redraws the state's congressional districts. The Eighth Circuit recorded that the House had passed it 90-65 and that Gov. Mike Kehoe signed it on September 28, 2025.
[02]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
The Senate voted 21-11 to give them final approval Friday afternoon
Report on the Missouri Senate's September 12, 2025 final approval of the congressional map, the legislature's reconvening at President Donald Trump's urging, and People Not Politicians' announcement that it had filed a referendum.
Gerrymandered congressional map, initiative petition limits sent to Missouri governor · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 12, 2025[03]United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Source excerpt
Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law.
Published per curiam opinion affirming Chief Judge Stephen Clark's temporary restraining order and directing entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map, with the injunction administratively stayed until September 28, 2026 at 5 p.m. Central time. Judge Stras concurred in part and dissented in part, writing that he would dismiss the appeal because People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn lack standing.
Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)
December 2025
People Not Politicians submits referendum petition signatures
Incident
People Not Politicians submitted more than 300,000 signatures, by its own count, seeking a statewide referendum on the 2025 map.
[03]United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Source excerpt
Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law.
Published per curiam opinion affirming Chief Judge Stephen Clark's temporary restraining order and directing entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map, with the injunction administratively stayed until September 28, 2026 at 5 p.m. Central time. Judge Stras concurred in part and dissented in part, writing that he would dismiss the appeal because People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn lack standing.
Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)[04]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
Our office will move immediately to seek relief from (the United States Supreme Court)
Report on the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, with reactions from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, Richard von Glahn and President Donald Trump.
Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 3, 2026
May 2026
Supreme Court of Missouri rules that submitting signatures did not suspend the map
Source release
In Maggard v. State, the Supreme Court of Missouri ruled unanimously that submitting referendum signatures did not automatically prevent the 2025 map from going into effect. In September the court described its May rulings as saying the map's status could not be determined until the Secretary of State certified the petition and judicial review was complete.
[05]St. Louis Public Radio
Source excerpt
did not automatically prevent a GOP-friendly congressional map from going into effect
Report that the Supreme Court of Missouri unanimously ruled on May 12, 2026 that submitting referendum signatures did not automatically prevent the 2025 map from going into effect.
In blow to Democrats, Missouri Supreme Court upholds map that targets Rep. Cleaver · St. Louis Public RadioArticle, May 12, 2026[06]Supreme Court of Missouri
Source excerpt
HB 1 is not the law and has never been the law.
Unanimous opinion reversing the Cole County Circuit Court. It holds that the referendum petition on House Bill 1 was legal, sufficient and timely, orders the Secretary of State to certify it for the November 2026 ballot, and enjoins him from using the 2025 map in the November 2026 general election unless voters approve it.
von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14
August 2026
Hoskins rejects the referendum petition and Missouri holds its primary
Incident
Secretary of State Denny Hoskins declared the referendum petition unconstitutional on the last day he could act, saying the Missouri Constitution does not allow a referendum on redistricting. Missouri held its primary the same day in the boundaries drawn in 2025, and People Not Politicians executive director Richard von Glahn sued in Cole County Circuit Court.
[07]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
Whether they had one signature or 500 million signatures doesn’t really matter because they are unconstitutional
Report that Secretary of State Denny Hoskins declared the referendum petition unconstitutional a few hours before polls closed in the August 4 primary, and that People Not Politicians sued in Cole County Circuit Court that night.
Missouri redistricting referendum blocked by secretary of state, drawing lawsuit · Missouri IndependentArticle, August 4, 2026[04]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
Our office will move immediately to seek relief from (the United States Supreme Court)
Report on the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, with reactions from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, Richard von Glahn and President Donald Trump.
Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 3, 2026
September 2026
Supreme Court of Missouri orders the referendum onto the ballot and the 2022 map for November
Source release
The Supreme Court of Missouri ruled unanimously that the referendum petition was legal, sufficient and timely, ordered Hoskins to place it on the November ballot, and enjoined him from using the 2025 map in the November general election unless voters approve it.
[06]Supreme Court of Missouri
Source excerpt
HB 1 is not the law and has never been the law.
Unanimous opinion reversing the Cole County Circuit Court. It holds that the referendum petition on House Bill 1 was legal, sufficient and timely, orders the Secretary of State to certify it for the November 2026 ballot, and enjoins him from using the 2025 map in the November 2026 general election unless voters approve it.
von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14[04]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
Our office will move immediately to seek relief from (the United States Supreme Court)
Report on the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, with reactions from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, Richard von Glahn and President Donald Trump.
Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 3, 2026Hoskins asks the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the state ruling as Republican candidates and voters sue
Incident
Hoskins applied to the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's ruling. The same day, Rep. Bob Onder, Sen. Rick Brattin and two voters sued Hoskins in federal court, arguing that the federal Constitution bars changing district boundaries between the primary and general elections.
[08]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
Application (26A304) denied by Justice Kavanaugh.
The Court's docket records Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's September 4 application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, the responses and amicus briefs filed September 4 to 7, and Justice Kavanaugh's September 8 denial.
Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026[09]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map
Report on the Supreme Court's September 25 order, with the sequence of court actions since September 3, the filings of Missouri and the plaintiffs, and county election officials' account of absentee voting under the 2022 map.
US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Vikram Amar argues that Missouri's federal objections are weak
Source release
Amar argues that Missouri may constitutionally use a referendum to suspend a redistricting law. He predicts that the state Supreme Court's ruling is unlikely to be overturned, citing state control of its lawmaking process and federal election precedents.
[10]Vikram Amar analyzes Missouri's federal challenge to the referendum
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Vikram Amar analyzes Missouri's federal challenge to the referendumOriginal article and publication dateJustice Kavanaugh denies the stay and a federal judge orders the 2025 map used
Incident
Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Hoskins's application on September 8. That evening, Chief Judge Stephen Clark issued a temporary restraining order directing Missouri to use the 2025 map in the November general election.
[08]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
Application (26A304) denied by Justice Kavanaugh.
The Court's docket records Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's September 4 application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, the responses and amicus briefs filed September 4 to 7, and Justice Kavanaugh's September 8 denial.
Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026[11]Onder v. Missouri, No. 4:26-cv-01424-SRC, Memorandum and Order (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2026)
Source excerpt
Plaintiffs face irreparable harm absent a TRO because many Missouri voters would have to cast their general-election votes for candidates whom they had no role in nominating.
Temporary restraining order in the lawsuit filed by Rep. Bob Onder, Rick Brattin and two voters. It directs Missouri to use the 2025 map (House Bill 1) for the November 2026 general election. The Supreme Court stayed this order on September 10.
[12]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos.
Unsigned per curiam order on an application that Circuit Justice Brett Kavanaugh referred to the full Court. It stays the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate and September 22 order and the district court's September 21 and 22 injunctions, keeps the Court's September 10 stay in place, and says the lower courts should not prohibit use of the 2022 map or require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri. The text of the order shows no separate opinion or noted dissent.
People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026U.S. Supreme Court stays the federal order requiring the 2025 map
Source release
In an unsigned order without stated reasons, the Supreme Court stayed Clark's September 8 order pending the Eighth Circuit appeal and any timely petition for certiorari. The Missouri Independent reported that no justice publicly dissented.
[13]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
The application for stay presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the Court is granted.
One-page unsigned order staying the district court's September 8 order pending the Eighth Circuit appeal and any timely petition for certiorari. The order gives no reasoning.
Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326[14]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
Application (26A326) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
The Court's docket records the September 9 stay application, the responses and briefs filed September 9 and 10, including the brief of the United States, and the September 10 order granting the stay.
Docket for No. 26A326, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 9 and 10, 2026[15]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
The law is the law, the Missouri Constitution is clear as was the Missouri Supreme Court,
Report on the Supreme Court's September 10 stay. It quotes Richard von Glahn's emailed statement, notes that the U.S. solicitor general joined Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in opposing the stay, and describes the order as unsigned with no publicly noted dissent.
US Supreme Court again blocks use of Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 10, 2026Supreme Court of Missouri finds Hoskins in contempt, then finds the contempt purged
Incident
The Supreme Court of Missouri found that Hoskins was in contempt when he told local election officials to use the 2025 map. After he directed local election authorities to use the 2022 map, the court found that he had corrected the conduct and purged the contempt.
[16]St. Louis Public Radio
Source excerpt
My Office is directing local election authorities to use the 2022 congressional map
Report on the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 10 contempt hearing for Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, his statement directing local election authorities to use the 2022 map, and statements from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, attorney Chuck Hatfield and Rep. Bob Onder.
Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt · St. Louis Public RadioArticle, published September 10, 2026 12:54 p.m. CDT and updated 8:15 p.m. CDTAmar commentary challenges the lower federal courts' reasoning
Source release
Akhil and Vikram Amar argue that using the 2025 map in the primary does not require repeating its use in November. They also invoke limits on federal review of state judgments and on late federal intervention in elections.
[17]Akhil and Vikram Amar analyze the federal-court conflict
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Akhil and Vikram Amar analyze the federal-court conflictOriginal article and publication date[18]Akhil and Vikram Amar defend Kavanaugh's refusal to intervene
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Akhil and Vikram Amar defend Kavanaugh's refusal to interveneOriginal article and publication datePetition signers sue Hoskins for damages over his handling of the map referendum
Five voters file a proposed class action seeking $500 for each of roughly 162,000 verified petition signers. They allege that Hoskins violated his duties in handling the referendum and map directives. The suit seeks damages; it does not itself decide which map is used.
[19]Missouri Independent reports petition-signers' damages suit against Hoskins
The brief reports a Friday filing and requested class damages. It distinguishes the damages claim from the litigation determining which map governs the election.
Missouri Independent reports petition-signers' damages suit against HoskinsComplete original news brief, filing date and damages/class allegations[20]FOX 2 reports voters' damages demand over the Missouri map referendum
Independent reporting corroborates the Friday filing and the request for roughly $500 for each of approximately 162,000 verified petition signers.
FOX 2 reports voters' damages demand over the Missouri map referendumFOX 2 original reporting syndicated by AOL; filing date, proposed class and statutory damages demandRhodes discusses who could qualify for damages in the Hoskins lawsuit
Source release
In an interview with Slate, law professor Charles Rhodes says the damages case may turn on who qualifies as an aggrieved person. He distinguishes voters whose districts changed from petition signers unaffected by the switch and suggests that a narrower case could be stronger.
[21]Rhodes discusses limits on the proposed Hoskins damages class
Rhodes discusses who might qualify for damages and why a narrower class could have a stronger case. His views do not establish liability or class certification.
Rhodes discusses limits on the proposed Hoskins damages classOriginal interview with Charles Rhodes; discussion of aggrieved persons under the Missouri damages statuteEighth Circuit holds that using the 2022 map violates the Constitution
Source release
A three-judge panel held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution and directed the district court to enter a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map, stayed until September 28. Judge Stras would have dismissed the appeal for lack of standing.
[03]United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Source excerpt
Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law.
Published per curiam opinion affirming Chief Judge Stephen Clark's temporary restraining order and directing entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map, with the injunction administratively stayed until September 28, 2026 at 5 p.m. Central time. Judge Stras concurred in part and dissented in part, writing that he would dismiss the appeal because People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn lack standing.
Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)[22]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
Voters cast their primary ballots under this map, and they should be able to vote in the same districts for the general election.
Report on the Eighth Circuit's September 21 ruling, with statements from Sen. Rick Brattin and Richard von Glahn.
Appeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 21, 2026People Not Politicians asks the Supreme Court to clarify or stay the Eighth Circuit ruling
Incident
People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn applied to the Supreme Court, asking it to clarify that its September 10 stay covers the Eighth Circuit's injunction or to stay the ruling. Absentee voting in Missouri began the same day.
[23]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
Application (26A388) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
The Court's docket records the September 22 stay application, the September 23 responses and amicus briefs, and the September 25 order granting the stay.
Docket for No. 26A388, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 22 to September 25, 2026[24]People Not Politicians
Source excerpt
That is the electoral disorder Purcell exists to prevent
Application by People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn asking the Court to clarify that its September 10 stay covers the Eighth Circuit's permanent injunction or, alternatively, to stay the Eighth Circuit's September 21 ruling.
Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388 · People Not PoliticiansApplication, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026[09]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map
Report on the Supreme Court's September 25 order, with the sequence of court actions since September 3, the filings of Missouri and the plaintiffs, and county election officials' account of absentee voting under the 2022 map.
US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Vikram Amar predicts that the new Eighth Circuit order will be blocked
Source release
Amar argues that the appellate ruling conflicts with the Supreme Court's earlier intervention and that election timing makes federal interference more problematic. He predicts another stay; the commentary precedes the Court's September 25 order.
[25]Vikram Amar predicts another Supreme Court intervention
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Vikram Amar predicts another Supreme Court interventionOriginal article and publication dateU.S. Supreme Court stays the federal injunctions and bars requiring the 2025 map
Source release
In an unsigned per curiam order, the Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions. It said the lower courts should not prohibit use of the 2022 map or require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri.
[12]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos.
Unsigned per curiam order on an application that Circuit Justice Brett Kavanaugh referred to the full Court. It stays the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate and September 22 order and the district court's September 21 and 22 injunctions, keeps the Court's September 10 stay in place, and says the lower courts should not prohibit use of the 2022 map or require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri. The text of the order shows no separate opinion or noted dissent.
People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026[23]Supreme Court of the United States
Source excerpt
Application (26A388) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
The Court's docket records the September 22 stay application, the September 23 responses and amicus briefs, and the September 25 order granting the stay.
Docket for No. 26A388, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 22 to September 25, 2026[09]Missouri Independent
Source excerpt
In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map
Report on the Supreme Court's September 25 order, with the sequence of court actions since September 3, the filings of Missouri and the plaintiffs, and county election officials' account of absentee voting under the 2022 map.
US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Vikram Amar sees the Missouri orders as evidence against a partisan-docket account
Source release
Amar argues that the Court's repeated rejection of the 2025 map complicates claims that its emergency docket generally favors Trump. He also reads the orders as reaffirming state-court authority and constraints on late federal election rulings.
[26]Vikram Amar examines lessons from the Missouri map orders
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Vikram Amar examines lessons from the Missouri map ordersOriginal article and publication date
October 2026
Missouri Independent reports that the organized pro-map campaign has gone quiet
Source release
Jason Hancock reports that Put Missouri First's Michael Hafner told St. Louis Public Radio there was no organized campaign to pass Proposition A at that time. Denny Hoskins says he believes map supporters are pursuing grassroots organizing. The article describes spending by the campaign against Proposition A. Voters' choice would govern the map from 2028, unless Missouri draws another one.
[27]Missouri Independent examines the Proposition A campaign
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Missouri Independent examines the Proposition A campaignOriginal article and publication dateKCUR examines possible post-election challenges after the map dispute
Source release
Anna Neumann explains the map litigation and the possibility of later election challenges. UMKC law professor Allen Rostron says close races and abrupt shifts in preliminary results can make challenges more likely. The report describes possible litigation, rather than an already filed post-election case.
[28]KCUR answers voter questions about Missouri election challenges
Published analysis distinguishes the existing map litigation from possible challenges after the election.
KCUR answers voter questions about Missouri election challengesAnna Neumann; questions about the maps and possible litigation.Hanaway says her office will defend use of the 2022 map
Source release
In a KCUR interview, Attorney General Catherine Hanaway says the 2022 map is now Missouri law following the Supreme Court's actions. She expects more litigation and says her office is prepared to defend the election's outcome.
[29]Catherine Hanaway discusses Missouri's maps with KCUR
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
Catherine Hanaway discusses Missouri's maps with KCUROriginal article and publication date
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
Because Missouri held its August primary under the 2025 map, the U.S. Constitution requires it to use that same map in the November general election, and using the 2022 map instead would violate Article I, Section 2 and equal protection.
Sources (1)
- Plaintiffs-Respondents' Brief in Opposition to Applicants' Renewed Emergency Application, No. 26A388 · Bob OnderBrief, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 23, 2026
Disputed claim
People Not Politicians
Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Sources (2)
- Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388 · People Not PoliticiansApplication, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026
- von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14
Disputed claim
People Not Politicians
Ordering Missouri to return to the 2025 map after ballots have been printed and mailed and voting has begun would create the electoral disorder that the Purcell principle exists to prevent.
Sources (1)
- Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388 · People Not PoliticiansApplication, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
31 responses. First 6 shown initially. Newest first.
Richard von GlahnExecutive director of People Not Politicians, the group that circulated the referendum petition, in a statement released after the U.S. Supreme Court's orderDirectly involved Before this statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that Missouri must use the 2025 map in November. On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed that ruling and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
"We are done with corrupt politicians trying to force their map into effect outside the process outlined in the Missouri constitution. We have said from the beginning, people, not politicians will be the final deciders on this DC power grab. We are moving forward to vote NO on Proposition A."
CondemnedResponding to: Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Full statement and sources
After the U.S. Supreme Court's order, von Glahn, executive director of People Not Politicians, said the group was "done with corrupt politicians trying to force their map into effect outside the process outlined in the Missouri constitution". He said the group was moving forward to vote no on Proposition A.
After the statement
The Missouri Independent reported that People Not Politicians bought about $800,000 of broadcast advertising that will run through Election Day.
Redistricting battle ends: US Supreme Court says Missouri must use 2022 mapArticle posted September 25, 2026 5:50 PM CDT; paragraph reproducing the statement of Richard von GlahnSupreme Court again rejects Trump-backed congressional mapArticle published September 25, 2026 5:22 PM CDT and updated; paragraph beginning "In a statement Friday evening"Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Von Glahn says the group is done with efforts to force the map into effect outside the process in the Missouri constitution, which rejects using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because the statement objects to the effort to use the map and does more than dispute a description of it.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Wesley BellU.S. Representative for Missouri's 1st District, posting on his official @RepWesleyBellMO accountBefore this statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions on September 25 and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
"The people of Missouri didn’t ask for this redistricting. Trump did. Once again, the Supreme Court ruled to protect the rights of Missourians."
CondemnedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Bell posted that the people of Missouri did not ask for the redistricting and that President Donald Trump did. He said that "Once again, the Supreme Court ruled to protect the rights of Missourians".
After the statement
The Missouri Independent reported that using the 2022 map means voters in 28 counties will be in different districts in November than they were in the August 4 primary.
Rep. Wesley Bell on X: the people of Missouri didn't ask for this redistricting · Wesley BellFull X post, published September 26, 2026 at 01:07 UTC (8:07 p.m. CDT on September 25), quoting an Associated Press postPeople Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Bell welcomes the Supreme Court's ruling as protecting Missourians and says the redistricting was Trump's request and not the people's, which condemns the effort to use the map. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because he attaches no condition.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
National Democratic Redistricting CommitteeNational Democratic redistricting organization, posting on its @DemRedistrict accountBefore this statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution. On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed that ruling and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
"BREAKING: SCOTUS just denied Missouri Republicans' third attempt to jam through their 2025 gerrymander! 👏 This reaffirms what the state's highest court already said weeks ago — the 2025 map was never the law. Missouri Republicans tried to silence voters. Today, they lost."
CondemnedResponding to: Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Full statement and sources
The National Democratic Redistricting Committee posted that the Supreme Court had "just denied Missouri Republicans' third attempt to jam through their 2025 gerrymander". It said the order reaffirms what the state's highest court said weeks earlier, that the 2025 map "was never the law", and that "Missouri Republicans tried to silence voters".
After the statement
The Missouri Independent reported that the 2025 map will be on the ballot as Proposition A.
NDRC on X: SCOTUS denied Missouri Republicans' third attempt · National Democratic Redistricting CommitteeFull X post, published September 25, 2026 at 22:44 UTC (5:44 p.m. CDT)Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The organization welcomes the ruling that keeps the 2025 map out of the general election and describes the effort to use it as an attempt to silence voters, which condemns that use. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because it attaches no condition.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Rick BrattinMissouri state senator, plaintiff in the federal lawsuit and Republican candidate in the 5th Congressional District, issuing a news releaseDirectly involved Before this statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions on September 25 and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election. Brattin, Rep. Bob Onder and two voters had sued Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in federal court on September 4. On September 21, after the Eighth Circuit's ruling, Brattin said voters "should be able to vote in the same districts for the general election".
"I am grateful to the Eighth Circuit for squarely addressing the merits of this case and stating plainly what common sense and the Constitution require: voters should not choose their nominees under one congressional map and then be forced into entirely different districts for the general election. … Today’s Supreme Court decision is a travesty for Missouri voters and for the integrity of our elections. Missouri will now conduct a congressional primary under one map and a general election under another. … The responsibility for this chaos rests first and foremost with the Missouri Supreme Court."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Because Missouri held its August primary under the 2025 map, the U.S. Constitution requires it to use that same map in the November general election, and using the 2022 map instead would violate Article I, Section 2 and equal protection.
Full statement and sources
In a news release, Brattin said he was grateful to the Eighth Circuit for stating "what common sense and the Constitution require" and called the U.S. Supreme Court's decision "a travesty for Missouri voters and for the integrity of our elections". He said voters who took part in the primary will be moved into districts where they had no voice in choosing the nominees, and that the responsibility for what he called chaos rests first with the Missouri Supreme Court.
After the statement
The Missouri Independent reported that the deadline to seek certiorari in the Eighth Circuit case is December 21.
Sen. Rick Brattin on X: statement on U.S. Supreme Court ruling · Rick BrattinFull X post containing a news release dated September 25, 2026, published September 26, 2026 at 00:33 UTC (7:33 p.m. CDT on September 25)People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Federal court says Missouri can't legally use 2022 voter map in NovemberArticle, September 21, 2026, quotation attributed to Sen. Rick Brattin in a statementWhy this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Brattin says voters should not be moved into different districts after choosing nominees in the primary and calls the ruling a travesty, which defends use of the 2025 map. The closest competing label, condemns, does not fit because his criticism is aimed at the courts' decisions and not at the use of the 2025 map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Bob OnderU.S. Representative for Missouri's 3rd District and lead plaintiff in the federal lawsuit, posting on his @BobOnderMO accountDirectly involvedBefore this statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions on September 25 and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election. Onder, Sen. Rick Brattin and two voters had sued Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in federal court on September 4. On September 22, in a radio interview, Onder said invalidating the primary would "invalidate our whole electoral process by judicial fiat".
"Another disappointing decision by the Supreme Court. The MO S Ct’s activist decision disenfranchised 1.2 million Missourians who voted on August 4th."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Onder posted that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision was another disappointing decision. He said the Missouri Supreme Court's "activist decision disenfranchised 1.2 million Missourians who voted on August 4th".
After the statement
The Missouri Independent reported that the deadline to seek certiorari in the Eighth Circuit case is December 21.
Rep. Bob Onder on X: another disappointing decision by the Supreme Court · Bob OnderFull X post, published September 25, 2026 at 23:53 UTC (6:53 p.m. CDT)People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Missouri Redistricting Showdown: Rep. Bob Onder on the 8th Circuit RulingVideo, about 4:53 to 5:12, interview with host Marc Cox on 97.1 FM Talk (St. Louis), posted September 22, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Onder criticizes the Supreme Court's decision and says the state court's ruling disenfranchised primary voters, which continues to favor using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, condemns, does not fit because his criticism is aimed at the courts' rulings and not at the use of the 2025 map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Emanuel CleaverU.S. Representative for Missouri's 5th District, posting on his official @repcleaver accountDirectly involvedBefore this statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions on September 25 and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election. The Missouri Independent reported that the 2025 map stretched the 5th District, which Cleaver represents, into rural counties along the Missouri River that the outlet described as Republican strongholds. It also reported that election officials began accepting absentee ballots on Tuesday, September 22.
"For more than a year, state officials have spent precious time, energy, and resources on an effort to silence the voices of Missouri voters and steal a congressional seat. Tonight, after more than 305,000 Missourians demanded a say, the Supreme Court has put this shameful and unlawful scheme to rest. Power to the people."
CondemnedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Cleaver said state officials had spent more than a year on an effort to "silence the voices of Missouri voters and steal a congressional seat". He said that after more than 305,000 Missourians demanded a say, the Supreme Court had put what he called a "shameful and unlawful scheme" to rest.
After the statement
The Missouri Independent reported that the deadline to seek certiorari in the Eighth Circuit case is December 21.
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: the Supreme Court has put this scheme to rest · Emanuel CleaverFull X post, published September 25, 2026 at 23:53 UTC (6:53 p.m. CDT), quoting an Associated Press postPeople Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Cleaver welcomes the Supreme Court's order and describes the effort to use the map as an unlawful scheme to silence voters, which condemns that use. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because he attaches no condition.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Show fewer responses
Mike KehoeGovernor of Missouri, in an official statement from the governor's officeDirectly involvedBefore this statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions on September 25 and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
"It is disappointing that today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court means Missouri will conduct its November general election under a different congressional map than its primary election. Voters deserved consistency and certainty, and not for the rules to be changed between elections. Nevertheless, Missouri will follow the Court’s order."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Kehoe called it disappointing that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision means Missouri will hold the November general election under a different congressional map than the primary. He said voters deserved consistency and certainty, and added that Missouri will follow the Court's order.
After the statement
As of the evening of September 25, 2026, we could not locate a later statement from Kehoe on the map. Before the Court's order, on September 8, he had said on X that the Missouri First Map would be used in the general election.
Governor Kehoe's Statement on SCOTUS's Congressional Map Decision (September 25, 2026) · Mike KehoeGovernor's office official statement, September 25, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Gov. Mike Kehoe on X: Missouri First Map will be used in the general election · Mike KehoeFull X post, published 2026-09-08 23:07 UTC (6:07 p.m. CDT)Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Kehoe says it is disappointing that the general election map will differ from the primary map and that voters deserved consistency, which continues to favor using the 2025 map, while committing to comply. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because the pledge to comply concerns what the State will do and does not change his stated view of what voters deserved.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Supreme Court of the United StatesUnsigned per curiam order of the full Court in No. 26A388, on an application referred by Circuit Justice Brett KavanaughBefore this statement
The Court had stayed the district court's first order requiring the 2025 map on September 10. On September 21, the Eighth Circuit ordered a permanent injunction requiring that map, and People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn applied to the Court for a stay on September 22.
"In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map—not the 2025 map—must be used in the 2026 congressional election. … At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos. Purcell protects against such disorder. … And the District Court and Court of Appeals should not order or otherwise require Missouri to use the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri."
CondemnedResponding to: Ordering Missouri to return to the 2025 map after ballots have been printed and mailed and voting has begun would create the electoral disorder that the Purcell principle exists to prevent.
Full statement and sources
In an unsigned per curiam order on an application for a stay, the Supreme Court kept Missouri's 2022 map for the 2026 election. Read its order and the docket.
After the statement
The order keeps the September 10 stay in place until the Court lifts it, and it says the district court and Eighth Circuit should not prohibit use of the 2022 map.
People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Docket for No. 26A388, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 22 to September 25, 2026Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The Court rejects that use on state-law and Purcell grounds and directs that lower courts not require it. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because the order's caution that the merits are not entirely clearcut does not qualify its operative direction against using the 2025 map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Missouri Democratic PartyChairman of the Missouri Democratic Party, quoted by St. Louis Public RadioBefore this statement
On September 25, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court said lower courts should not enjoin use of the 2022 map or require Missouri to use the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election, according to St. Louis Public Radio.
"Republican politicians have wasted enough taxpayer dollars on this effort when they should have been working to address the rising costs facing regular Missourians across this state This gerrymander was never about serving the Missouri families or seniors who are facing rising grocery bills and rising healthcare costs under Republican control."
CondemnedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan said Republican politicians had wasted enough taxpayer dollars on the effort to use the 2025 map when they should have been working on rising costs facing Missourians. He said the gerrymander was never about serving Missouri families or seniors facing rising grocery and healthcare costs.
After the statement
St. Louis Public Radio reported that Carnahan said the Supreme Court's decision was a repudiation of how Secretary of State Denny Hoskins acted and of how Republicans sowed confusion in the run-up to the 2026 election cycle.
U.S. Supreme Court again blocks Missouri from using Trump-backed congressional map · St. Louis Public RadioSection 'Referendum proponents forge ahead', paragraphs quoting Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ CarnahanPeople Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is Missouri's use of its 2025 congressional map in the November 2026 general election. Carnahan said Republican politicians had wasted taxpayer dollars on the effort and called the map a gerrymander that was never about serving Missouri families. That criticizes the push to use the 2025 map, so we labeled it Condemned.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Catherine HanawayAttorney General of Missouri, whose office filed the brief for the State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in No. 26A388Directly involvedBefore this statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution and directed entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map. On September 22, People Not Politicians asked the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify or stay that ruling.
"Regardless of whether this Court grants a stay or leaves the Eighth Circuit’s injunction in place, Missouri and its Secretary of State (collectively, “the State”) will do whatever they can to help local election officials comply. Yet the honest truth is that—regardless of what this Court does—Missouri will not be able to run an orderly 2026 General Election. … Although no option is ideal, the State believes that voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest. … The State acknowledges this Court’s prior stay order represented a preliminary indication that it views this situation differently … More than anything, Missouri voters need stability. The Secretary respectfully believes that denying a stay—and declining to change Missouri’s congressional map for a fifth time—is the best way to promote stability."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
In a brief opposing the stay application, the Missouri Attorney General's office said Missouri would not be able to run an orderly general election whichever way the Court ruled. It wrote that "the State believes that voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest", and that the Secretary of State believes denying a stay is the best way to promote stability. The brief acknowledged that the Court's earlier stay order was "a preliminary indication that it views this situation differently".
After the statement
On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
Opposition to Application for Stay, State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, No. 26A388 · Catherine HanawayBrief, Introduction, pp. 1-3, filed September 23, 2026Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388 · People Not PoliticiansApplication, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The brief says the State believes voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest and asks the Court to deny the stay, which defends that use. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because the brief's acknowledgments concern the Court's likely view and Missouri's ability to administer the election, and the brief still states the State's preference for the 2025 map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Campaign Legal CenterLegal advocacy organization filing an amicus brief with the ACLU of Missouri Foundation and the ACLU FoundationBefore this statement
The Eighth Circuit had ordered a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map on September 21, and absentee voting in Missouri began on September 22.
"Pursuant to this Court’s orders and the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling on state law, election administration has proceeded under the 2022 map, ballots have already been mailed, and voting has begun. … This Court must once again step in to restore order by granting the Applicants’ requested relief."
CondemnedResponding to: Ordering Missouri to return to the 2025 map after ballots have been printed and mailed and voting has begun would create the electoral disorder that the Purcell principle exists to prevent.
Full statement and sources
In an amicus brief, the Campaign Legal Center, the ACLU of Missouri Foundation and the ACLU Foundation wrote that election administration had proceeded under the 2022 map, that ballots had been mailed and that "voting has begun." They asked the Court to restore order by granting the applicants' requested relief.
After the statement
The Supreme Court granted the applicants' stay on September 25.
Brief of Amici Curiae Campaign Legal Center, ACLU of Missouri Foundation and ACLU Foundation, No. 26A388 · Campaign Legal CenterBrief, Summary of Argument, p. 3, filed September 23, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The brief argues that the election is under way under the 2022 map and asks the Court to stop the Eighth Circuit's order requiring the 2025 map, which opposes that use. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because the brief seeks a specific outcome.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Bob OnderU.S. Representative for Missouri's 3rd District and lead plaintiff in the federal lawsuit, interviewed on 97.1 FM TalkDirectly involved
Before this statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution. Onder and Sen. Rick Brattin had sued Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in federal court on September 4.
"to invalidate a primary in which 1.2 million Missourians chose their primary candidates is really to invalidate our whole electoral process by judicial fiat. A very bad decision by the Missouri Supreme Court, an excellent decision yesterday by the Eighth Circuit."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Because Missouri held its August primary under the 2025 map, the U.S. Constitution requires it to use that same map in the November general election, and using the 2022 map instead would violate Article I, Section 2 and equal protection.
Full statement and sources
In a radio interview the morning after the Eighth Circuit's ruling, Onder said that invalidating a primary in which 1.2 million Missourians voted would "invalidate our whole electoral process by judicial fiat." He called the Supreme Court of Missouri's decision very bad and the Eighth Circuit's decision excellent.
After the statement
In the same interview, Onder said he hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would deny certiorari and that a yes vote on Proposition A would be a vote for the 2025 map.
Missouri Redistricting Showdown: Rep. Bob Onder on the 8th Circuit RulingVideo, about 4:53 to 5:12, interview with host Marc Cox on 97.1 FM Talk (St. Louis), posted September 22, 2026Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Onder argues that using a different map in the general election would nullify the primary and praises the ruling that requires the 2025 map, which defends that use. The closest competing label, condemns, does not fit because his criticism targets the state court's decision, not the use of the map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Jason SmithU.S. Representative for Missouri's 8th District, posting on his @JasonSmithMO accountBefore this statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution and directed entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map. The Missouri Independent reported that the court put the decision on hold.
"I applaud the Eighth Circuit for reinstating the 2025 Missouri First Map. I’ve said it many times before, and I’ll say it again: changing the map in the middle of the election cycle disenfranchises voters and would send Missouri into a constitutional crisis. The voters voted for the 2025 map, and have already voted in primaries under it. Any reversion is a blatant move by rogue liberal judges to subvert the will of the voters."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Smith applauded the Eighth Circuit for reinstating the 2025 map, which he calls the Missouri First Map. He said changing the map in the middle of the election cycle "disenfranchises voters" and would send Missouri into a constitutional crisis, and he called any reversion "a blatant move by rogue liberal judges to subvert the will of the voters".
After the statement
On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
Rep. Jason Smith on X: applauds the Eighth Circuit for reinstating the 2025 Missouri First Map · Jason SmithFull X post, published September 21, 2026 at 22:47 UTC (5:47 p.m. CDT)Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)Appeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 21, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Smith welcomes the ruling that requires the 2025 map and says any reversion to the 2022 map would subvert the voters, which defends that use. The closest competing label, condemns, does not fit because his criticism is aimed at judges who would order a change and not at the use of the 2025 map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Missouri Democratic PartyState political party, posting on its @MoDemParty account
Before this statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution and directed entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map. The Missouri Independent reported that the court put the decision on hold.
"Ballots have been printed, the election is in 43 days, and the so-called “Missouri First” maps are still not the law of the land — and have never been. We are confident that this will soon be resolved and that Missourians will vote under the 2022 maps — and NO on Proposition A."
CondemnedResponding to: Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Full statement and sources
The Missouri Democratic Party posted that ballots have been printed and that the so-called "Missouri First" maps are not "the law of the land" and "have never been". It said it was confident the matter would soon be resolved and that "Missourians will vote under the 2022 maps", and it added "NO on Proposition A".
After the statement
On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
Missouri Democratic Party on X: the so-called Missouri First maps have never been the law · Missouri Democratic PartyFull X post with attached image, published September 22, 2026 at 00:42 UTC (7:42 p.m. CDT on September 21)Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)Appeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 21, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The party says the 2025 maps are not the law and that Missourians will vote under the 2022 maps, which rejects using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because the post states a legal conclusion and an expected outcome and does more than dispute a label.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Richard von GlahnExecutive director of People Not Politicians, the group that circulated the referendum petition and intervened in the federal caseDirectly involved Before this statement
The Eighth Circuit ruled on September 21, 2026 that Missouri must use the 2025 map in November and stayed its order until September 28. People Not Politicians attorney Chuck Hatfield said the group planned to appeal, the Missouri Independent reported.
"Ballots have been printed, and Missourians have already voted … Thousands more will vote before this order seeks to take effect. Officials should stop wasting taxpayers’ money on pointless legal action and instead focus on administering our elections."
CondemnedResponding to: Ordering Missouri to return to the 2025 map after ballots have been printed and mailed and voting has begun would create the electoral disorder that the Purcell principle exists to prevent.
Full statement and sources
In a statement reported after the Eighth Circuit ruled that Missouri must use the 2025 map, von Glahn said "Ballots have been printed, and Missourians have already voted" and that officials should stop pursuing "pointless legal action." He said he was confident the U.S. Supreme Court would again find that the 2022 map would be used in November.
After the statement
On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's mandate and the district court's injunctions that required the 2025 map.
Appeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 21, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Von Glahn says ballots have been printed and voting has begun, calls the legal effort to change the map "pointless" and says he expects the 2022 map to be used, which opposes using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because he opposes the outcome rather than disputing a description.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Rick BrattinMissouri state senator, Republican nominee for the 5th Congressional District and plaintiff in the federal lawsuitDirectly involved Before this statement
The Eighth Circuit ruled on September 21 that Missouri must use the 2025 map in November, and it stayed its order until September 28.
"Voters cast their primary ballots under this map, and they should be able to vote in the same districts for the general election … Changing the map halfway through an election forces people into different districts with candidates they never had a chance to choose in the primary. That defies common sense and undermines the entire electoral process."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Because Missouri held its August primary under the 2025 map, the U.S. Constitution requires it to use that same map in the November general election, and using the 2022 map instead would violate Article I, Section 2 and equal protection.
Full statement and sources
In a statement on the Eighth Circuit's ruling, Brattin said voters cast their primary ballots under the 2025 map and "should be able to vote in the same districts for the general election." He said changing the map halfway through an election forces people into different districts with candidates they had no chance to choose in the primary.
After the statement
KOMU reported that Brattin is running in the 5th Congressional District, where the 2022 lines include a more liberal voter base than the 2025 lines.
Federal court says Missouri can't legally use 2022 voter map in NovemberArticle, September 21, 2026, quotation attributed to Sen. Rick Brattin in a statementAppeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 21, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Brattin argues that voters should vote in the same districts in the general election as in the primary, which defends using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because he states no condition on that position.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitPer curiam opinion of a three-judge panel (Judges Loken, Stras and Smith) of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitBefore this statement
The appeal was submitted to the panel on September 17 from Chief Judge Stephen Clark's September 8 order requiring the 2025 map, which the U.S. Supreme Court had stayed on September 10.
"This Court holds that Missouri’s current plan to use the 2022 map in the November 2026 general election violates the Constitution. Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law. … Any confusion stems from the last-minute decision by a state court to switch the congressional map."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Because Missouri held its August primary under the 2025 map, the U.S. Constitution requires it to use that same map in the November general election, and using the 2022 map instead would violate Article I, Section 2 and equal protection.
Full statement and sources
In a per curiam opinion, a three-judge panel held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution. It directed the district court to enter a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map, stayed until September 28 so the Supreme Court could review. Judge Stras, concurring in part and dissenting in part, wrote that he would dismiss the appeal because People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn lack standing.
After the statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the panel's mandate and the resulting injunctions on September 25.
Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The panel holds that the Constitution requires that map and forbids the 2022 map, which supports using it, not merely permitting it. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because Judge Stras's separate view concerns standing and does not qualify the panel's holding.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election AuthoritiesStatewide professional association of Missouri's county clerks and local election authorities, in a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Before this statement
On September 10, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed a federal order requiring the 2025 map, and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins then directed local election authorities to use the 2022 map, KCUR reported. A three-judge Eighth Circuit panel was to hear arguments in the federal case on Thursday, September 17.
"At this point, it is practically impossible to revert to the HB 1 map due to the extensive time and cost required to reprint and distribute new ballots within statutory timelines. Any further change inflicts additional vertigo on local election authorities—and the millions of Missourians who rely on them—after ostensibly-final resolution consistent with Missouri law"
CondemnedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
In a friend-of-the-court brief filed September 15 in the Eighth Circuit, the Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities asked the court to reverse the district court's September 8 temporary restraining order, which barred the Secretary of State from using the pre-House Bill 1 map. It wrote that it is practically impossible to revert to the House Bill 1 map because of the time and cost of reprinting and distributing new ballots, and that any further change inflicts additional vertigo on local election authorities and the millions of Missourians who rely on them.
After the statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit ruled that Missouri must use the 2025 map. Democracy Docket reported that the court predicted election administrators would need only a "few days" to change ballots. On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate.
Brief of Amicus Curiae Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities in Support of Appellants for Reversal of Temporary Restraining Order, Onder v. Von Glahn, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. filed Sept. 15, 2026)Conclusion, brief page 12Missouri election workers warned switching maps this late is ‘practically impossible’ but the 8th Circuit ordered it anywayParagraphs beginning "The Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities, which represents members from all 116 local election jurisdictions"Missouri Republicans ask federal court to revive gerrymandered map and block referendumSection headed "Timing issues"People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The fixed reference point is use of Missouri's 2025 map (House Bill 1) in the November 3, 2026 general election. The association's brief asked the Eighth Circuit to reverse the order requiring that map and argued that reverting to it is practically impossible because of the time and cost of reprinting and distributing ballots. The brief says its purpose is to illustrate the financial and practical burdens of changing the congressional district lines. It argues against using the 2025 map in the general election, so we labeled it Condemned.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
JD VanceVice President of the United States, answering a KMBC reporter's question at an event in the Kansas City areaBefore this statement
On September 3, the Supreme Court of Missouri ruled that the 2022 map would be used in the November 2026 general election. On September 10, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the federal order that had required the 2025 map.
"you already had a primary election where people cast ballots with the districts as they exist now … That, to me, is an affront to the democratic process. … And given that they've let these maps exist during the primary election, it seems to make sense to let them exist for the general election"
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
During a visit to the Kansas City area to discuss anti-fraud measures, Vance was asked about the Missouri redistricting dispute. He said that if the courts did not do what he thought they should, voters could cast general election ballots in districts different from those used in the primary, which he called "an affront to the democratic process". He said that because the maps were allowed to exist in the primary, "it seems to make sense to let them exist for the general election".
After the statement
On September 21, the Eighth Circuit held that using the 2022 map in the November general election violates the Constitution. On September 25, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed that ruling and said lower courts should not require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election.
JD Vance calls Missouri Supreme Court redistricting decision 'an affront to the democratic process'Article, updated September 14, 2026 2:21 PM CDT; the page carries the clip of Vance's answer, about 0:35 to 1:10 of the clipvon Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Vance says the maps were used in the primary and that it makes sense to let them exist in the general election, and he calls different districts "an affront to the democratic process", which defends that use. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because he states his view without attaching a condition to it.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Jon PattersonSpeaker of the Missouri House of Representatives Before this statement
The U.S. Supreme Court had stayed the federal order requiring the 2025 map on September 10, the day of this report.
"I don’t think anybody out there agrees with everything … But the courts have ruled. I respect the courts. I respect the rule of law. It’s time for us to print the ballots and go vote."
Mixed or conditionalCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Missouri House Speaker Jon Patterson, who will see different candidates on his November ballot, said that not everyone agrees with everything but that the courts have ruled and "It's time for us to print the ballots and go vote."
After the statement
In the same report, Gov. Mike Kehoe said he would like the map used in the August primary to be the map Missourians vote on in November.
Missouri redistricting ruling draws strong reaction from state leadersArticle, updated September 10, 2026 9:25 p.m. CDTWhy this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Patterson accepts the court rulings that leave the 2022 map in place while acknowledging disagreement, and he argues neither for nor against the 2025 map. The label combines acceptance with an acknowledged reservation, and condemns loses because he criticizes neither the map nor its use.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Richard von GlahnExecutive director of People Not Politicians, the group that circulated the referendum petition and intervened in the federal caseDirectly involved Before this statement
The Supreme Court on September 10 stayed Chief Judge Stephen Clark's order requiring the 2025 map, which revived the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, the Missouri Independent reported.
"The law is the law, the Missouri constitution is clear as was the Missouri Supreme Court … People, not politicians, will have the final say when they vote NO on Proposition A this November."
CondemnedResponding to: Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Full statement and sources
In a statement after the Supreme Court stayed the federal order requiring the 2025 map, von Glahn said "The law is the law" and that the Missouri constitution and the Supreme Court of Missouri were clear. He said voters "will have the final say when they vote NO on Proposition A this November."
After the statement
On September 21, after the Eighth Circuit ruled the other way, von Glahn said he was confident the U.S. Supreme Court would again find that the 2022 map would be used in November.
Supreme Court blocks Republican-favored Missouri election map, ending legal whiplash · ABC NewsArticle, September 10, 2026, statement of Richard von GlahnUS Supreme Court again blocks use of Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 10, 2026Appeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 21, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Von Glahn welcomes the stay that leaves the 2022 map in place and says Missouri law is clear, which opposes using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because he defends the outcome as required by law rather than disputing a description.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Emanuel CleaverU.S. Representative for Missouri's 5th District, posting on his official @repcleaver accountDirectly involved
Before this statement
The Supreme Court's September 10 order stayed the federal order requiring the 2025 map. The Missouri Independent reported that the 2025 map was designed to make the 5th District, which Cleaver represents, more favorable to Republicans.
"A win for justice. A win for democracy. A win for the people of Missouri. It is my hope that state officials will start following court orders and end this shameful attempt to break Missouri law and silence Missouri voters."
CondemnedResponding to: Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Full statement and sources
Cleaver responded to the Supreme Court's September 10 stay by calling it a win for justice, democracy and the people of Missouri. He said he hoped state officials would follow court orders and end what he called a "shameful attempt to break Missouri law and silence Missouri voters."
After the statement
Later on September 10, the Supreme Court of Missouri found Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in contempt, then ruled that he had purged the contempt by directing use of the 2022 map.
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: a win for justice, a win for democracy · Emanuel CleaverFull X post, published 2026-09-10 17:03 UTC (12:03 p.m. CDT), quoting an NBC News report on the Supreme Court's stayOrder in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326US Supreme Court again blocks use of Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 10, 2026Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt · St. Louis Public RadioArticle, published September 10, 2026 12:54 p.m. CDT and updated 8:15 p.m. CDTWhy this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Cleaver welcomes the stay that keeps the 2025 map out of the general election and criticizes the effort to use it as a breach of Missouri law, which condemns that use. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because he attaches no condition.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
D. John SauerSolicitor General of the United States, filing a brief for the United States as amicus curiae in No. 26A326Before this statement
People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn applied to the Court on September 9 to stay Chief Judge Stephen Clark's September 8 order requiring the 2025 map. Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins also opposed the stay, the Missouri Independent reported.
"Instead, it maintained the status quo ante by requiring Missouri to conduct its general election under the map that the State had used for the primary, and under which the voters, candidates, and political parties had long been operating. … This Court should deny the application for a stay."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Because Missouri held its August primary under the 2025 map, the U.S. Constitution requires it to use that same map in the November general election, and using the 2022 map instead would violate Article I, Section 2 and equal protection.
Full statement and sources
In a brief for the United States supporting the respondents, Solicitor General Sauer told the Supreme Court that the district court's order maintained the status quo ante by requiring Missouri to hold its general election under the map used in the primary. He asked the Court to deny the stay application.
After the statement
The Court granted the stay later on September 10 without a noted dissent.
Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A326 · United States Department of JusticeBrief pp. 1, 15-16 and Conclusion, filed September 10, 2026Docket for No. 26A326, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 9 and 10, 2026US Supreme Court again blocks use of Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 10, 2026People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The brief argues that requiring the primary map preserves the status quo and asks the Court to leave that requirement in place, which defends using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because the brief defends the outcome itself, beyond any description of it.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Hakeem JeffriesU.S. Representative for New York's 8th District and House Democratic Leader, posting on his official @RepJeffries accountBefore this statement
On September 8, Chief Judge Stephen Clark ordered Missouri to use the 2025 map, shortly after Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's ruling.
"The U.S. Supreme Court UPHELD a Virginia Supreme Court decision on redistricting that threw out a map approved by millions of voters. MAGA Republicans now want those same conservative Justices to do the exact opposite and OVERTURN a clearly-decided Missouri Supreme Court decision they don’t like. The American people are watching."
CondemnedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Jeffries posted that the U.S. Supreme Court had upheld a Virginia Supreme Court decision on redistricting that threw out a map approved by millions of voters. He said Republicans now want the same justices to "OVERTURN a clearly-decided Missouri Supreme Court decision they don't like", and that "The American people are watching".
After the statement
On September 10, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed Clark's order.
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries on X: Missouri Supreme Court decision and the U.S. Supreme Court · Hakeem JeffriesFull X post, published September 10, 2026 at 02:08 UTC (10:08 p.m. EDT on September 9)Onder v. Missouri, No. 4:26-cv-01424-SRC, Memorandum and Order (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2026)Doc. 35, pp. 1-13Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Jeffries criticizes the Republican effort to have the U.S. Supreme Court overturn the Missouri ruling that put the 2022 map in place for November. He does not name the 2025 map, but that ruling is what bars its use, so his criticism opposes using it. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because he objects to the effort itself and not to a description of it.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Catherine HanawayAttorney General of Missouri, posting on her official @AGCHanaway accountDirectly involved
Before this statement
Chief Judge Stephen Clark issued an order on September 8 requiring Missouri to use the 2025 map, shortly after Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's ruling.
"Missouri is prepared to follow and comply with Chief Judge Clark's order that binds the state to using the Missouri FIRST map for the November General Election. We maintain that changing the congressional map in between the primary and general elections is simply not feasible and profoundly unjust to Missouri voters."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Hanaway said Missouri would comply with Chief Judge Stephen Clark's order requiring the 2025 map in November. She said the State maintains that changing the congressional map between the primary and general elections is not feasible and is "profoundly unjust to Missouri voters."
After the statement
On September 10, after the U.S. Supreme Court stayed Clark's order, Hanaway said her office affirmed Hoskins's direction to local election authorities to use the 2022 map. On September 23, the Missouri Attorney General's Office told the Court that the State believes voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest.
Attorney General Catherine Hanaway on X: Missouri prepared to comply with Chief Judge Clark's order · Catherine HanawayFull X post, published 2026-09-08 22:52 UTC (5:52 p.m. CDT)Onder v. Missouri, No. 4:26-cv-01424-SRC, Memorandum and Order (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2026)Doc. 35, pp. 1-13People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt · St. Louis Public RadioArticle, published September 10, 2026 12:54 p.m. CDT and updated 8:15 p.m. CDTOpposition to Application for Stay, State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, No. 26A388 · Catherine HanawayBrief, Introduction, pp. 1-3, filed September 23, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Hanaway argues that switching maps after the primary is unjust and infeasible, which defends using the 2025 map. The closest competing label, “Mixed or conditional”, loses because her compliance statement does not qualify that position.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Mike KehoeGovernor of Missouri, posting on his official @GovMikeKehoe accountDirectly involved
Before this statement
Chief Judge Stephen Clark issued an order on September 8 requiring Missouri to use the 2025 map, shortly after Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's ruling.
"We are grateful for Chief Judge Clark’s decision to provide much-needed clarity for Missouri voters and the election process. With today marking the deadline for changes to the November ballot, the Missouri First Map will be used in the general election. Voters and candidates deserve consistency, certainty, and not to have the rules changed between elections."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Kehoe welcomed Chief Judge Stephen Clark's order and said the map used in the primary, which he calls the Missouri First Map, would be used in the general election. He said voters and candidates deserve consistency and certainty and should not have the rules changed between elections.
After the statement
The U.S. Supreme Court stayed Clark's order on September 10. The Eighth Circuit recorded that the 2025 map was passed in an extraordinary session called by Kehoe.
Gov. Mike Kehoe on X: Missouri First Map will be used in the general election · Mike KehoeFull X post, published 2026-09-08 23:07 UTC (6:07 p.m. CDT)Onder v. Missouri, No. 4:26-cv-01424-SRC, Memorandum and Order (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2026)Doc. 35, pp. 1-13People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitOpinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Kehoe supports that use and objects to changing rules between the primary and the general election. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because he defends the outcome rather than disputing a description.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Missouri Republican PartyState political party, posting on its @MissouriGOP accountBefore this statement
On September 3, the Supreme Court of Missouri ruled that the 2022 map would be used in the November 2026 general election. On September 4, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay that ruling.
"We stand with Secretary of State Denny Hoskins. Missouri voters already cast their ballots in the August primary using the Missouri First Map. Now, just weeks before the general election, the Missouri Supreme Court has ordered the state to abandon those districts and conduct November’s election under a different map. Secretary Hoskins is right to keep fighting. Missouri’s elections should not be thrown into chaos, and the votes of more than a million Missourians should not be disregarded. … We stand with @DLHoskins, @AGCHanaway , and their fight to defend the Missouri First Map all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
The Missouri Republican Party said it stands with Secretary of State Denny Hoskins and that Missouri voters already cast primary ballots using the Missouri First Map. It said the Supreme Court of Missouri had ordered the state to conduct the November election under a different map, that Hoskins "is right to keep fighting", and that "the votes of more than a million Missourians should not be disregarded".
After the statement
On September 8, Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Hoskins's application and Chief Judge Stephen Clark ordered use of the 2025 map. On September 10, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed Clark's order.
Missouri Republican Party on X: we stand with Secretary of State Denny Hoskins · Missouri Republican PartyFull X post with attached image, published September 6, 2026 at 17:19 UTC (12:19 p.m. CDT)von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026Onder v. Missouri, No. 4:26-cv-01424-SRC, Memorandum and Order (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2026)Doc. 35, pp. 1-13Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The party backs the fight to keep the map used in the primary for the general election and says the primary votes should not be disregarded, which defends that use. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because the post supports an outcome and does not dispute a description.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Republican National CommitteeNational party committee, filing as intervenor-respondent with the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Missouri Republican State CommitteeBefore this statement
The Supreme Court of Missouri had ruled on September 3 that the 2022 map remains in force for the November general election, and Hoskins applied to the U.S. Supreme Court on September 4 for a stay.
"It is difficult to imagine a judicial action that could sow more confusion among the electorate or inflict more damage to the public’s confidence in the integrity of the congressional elections than the relief the Missouri Supreme Court granted."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
In a brief supporting Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's stay application, the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Missouri Republican State Committee wrote that it is difficult to imagine a judicial action that could "sow more confusion among the electorate" than the relief the Supreme Court of Missouri granted. They asked the U.S. Supreme Court to grant Hoskins's application.
After the statement
Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied Hoskins's application on September 8.
Intervenors-Respondents' Brief in Support of Applicant's Emergency Application for Stay, Hoskins v. Von Glahn, No. 26A304 · Republican National CommitteeBrief p. 2, filed September 4, 2026Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The committees oppose the state court's order, which barred that map, and ask the Court to stay it, which defends using the map. The closest competing label, condemns, does not fit because their criticism is aimed at the state court, not at the use of the map.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Donald TrumpPresident of the United States, posting on his Truth Social accountBefore this statement
The Supreme Court of Missouri ruled unanimously that day that the 2025 map cannot be used in the November general election. In September 2025, Trump had urged the Missouri Senate on social media to pass the map as it was.
"The Missouri Supreme Court just ridiculously ruled in favor of changing the maps back to what they were a long time ago. It’s called, Ancient History! The problem is, according to Legal Scholars, that not only was the ruling horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional, but there won’t be enough time to change the map back with the Election coming up in a very short period of time. The Election Process, as usual, is being disturbed in America! Missouri must be able to use the map that was in effect just a couple of months ago, in the Primary. This is a Dark Day for “Justice” in Missouri!"
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
Trump wrote on Truth Social that the Supreme Court of Missouri's ruling was "horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional" and that there would not be enough time to change the map back. He said Missouri "must be able to use the map that was in effect just a couple of months ago, in the Primary."
After the statement
Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said the same day that her office would seek relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Donald Trump says Missouri must be able to use the primary map · Donald TrumpTruth Social post 117209653242980598, published September 3, 2026 at 7:16 p.m. EDTMissouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 3, 2026After hearing from Trump, Missouri GOP muscle gerrymandered map forward in state Senate · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 10, 2025Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Trump says Missouri must be able to use the primary map, which is the 2025 map. His criticism of the state court is criticism of a third party, so the closest competing label, condemns, does not fit the reference point.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Denny HoskinsMissouri Secretary of State, the state's chief election official and a defendant in the state and federal casesDirectly involvedBefore this statement
On September 2, after the Supreme Court of Missouri heard argument, Hoskins said he intended to run the November election in the boundaries drawn in 2025, and that he would use the 2025 map if the court's order did not specify the 2022 map, according to the Missouri Independent.
"Today’s Missouri Supreme Court rulings ignite nothing short of a Constitutional crisis. No court has ever rejected a congressional map that had already been used in an election, as the Missouri First Map was in the August primary. We may have lost the battle today, but the war to preserve our constitutional republic is far from over."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
Full statement and sources
In a news release on the day of the Supreme Court of Missouri's rulings, Hoskins said no court has ever rejected a congressional map that had already been used in an election. He added, "We may have lost the battle today, but the war to preserve our constitutional republic is far from over."
After the statement
On September 10, the Supreme Court of Missouri found Hoskins in contempt for directing local election officials to use the 2025 map, then ruled that he had purged the contempt after he directed them to use the 2022 map.
Statement from Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, CPA (September 3, 2026) · Denny HoskinsMissouri Secretary of State news release, For Immediate Release: Sept. 3, 2026Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 3, 2026Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt · St. Louis Public RadioArticle, published September 10, 2026 12:54 p.m. CDT and updated 8:15 p.m. CDTWhy this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. Hoskins treats the ruling that bars the map from the general election as a constitutional crisis and says the fight continues, which defends using the map. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because his objection is to the map being barred, not to how it is described.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Supreme Court of MissouriUnanimous en banc opinion of Missouri's highest court, written by Judge Ginger K. GoochBefore this statement
Secretary of State Denny Hoskins declared the referendum petition unconstitutional on August 4, 2026, the day of the primary, and the primary was held in the boundaries drawn in 2025.
"HB 1 is not the law and has never been the law. There is only one valid congressional redistricting in effect—the congressional redistricting the General Assembly established in 2022. … The congressional redistricting the General Assembly established in 2022 remains in full force and effect for the November 2026 general election."
CondemnedResponding to: Under the Missouri Constitution, the referendum petition kept House Bill 1 from taking effect, so the 2022 map is the only valid congressional map and must be used in the 2026 general election.
Full statement and sources
In a unanimous en banc opinion by Judge Ginger Gooch, the court said House Bill 1 "is not the law and has never been the law" and that the 2022 districts remain in force for the November 2026 general election. It ordered Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to certify the referendum petition and enjoined him from using the 2025 map.
After the statement
Hoskins issued a statement the same day calling the rulings a constitutional crisis, and Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said her office would seek relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.
von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14Missouri redistricting referendum blocked by secretary of state, drawing lawsuit · Missouri IndependentArticle, August 4, 2026Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 3, 2026Why this label?
The reference point is use of the 2025 map in the 2026 general election. The court holds that the map never took effect and enjoins its use in that election. The closest competing label, “Challenged the characterization”, loses because the court goes beyond disputing a description and directs that the map not be used.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(60)
Original text
People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026)
Relevant passage: Slip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026
Excerpt
"At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos."
About this source
Unsigned per curiam order on an application that Circuit Justice Brett Kavanaugh referred to the full Court. It stays the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate and September 22 order and the district court's September 21 and 22 injunctions, keeps the Court's September 10 stay in place, and says the lower courts should not prohibit use of the 2022 map or require use of the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri. The text of the order shows no separate opinion or noted dissent.
- Author
- Supreme Court of the United States (per curiam)
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
FOX 2 reports voters' damages demand over the Missouri map referendum
Relevant passage: FOX 2 original reporting syndicated by AOL; filing date, proposed class and statutory damages demand
About this source
Independent reporting corroborates the Friday filing and the request for roughly $500 for each of approximately 162,000 verified petition signers.
- Author
- Joey Schneider
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri Independent reports petition-signers' damages suit against Hoskins
Relevant passage: Complete original news brief, filing date and damages/class allegations
About this source
The brief reports a Friday filing and requested class damages. It distinguishes the damages claim from the litigation determining which map governs the election.
- Author
- Jason Hancock
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Rhodes discusses limits on the proposed Hoskins damages class
Relevant passage: Original interview with Charles Rhodes; discussion of aggrieved persons under the Missouri damages statute
About this source
Rhodes discusses who might qualify for damages and why a narrower class could have a stronger case. His views do not establish liability or class certification.
- Author
- Shirin Ali
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
KCUR answers voter questions about Missouri election challenges
Relevant passage: Anna Neumann; questions about the maps and possible litigation.
About this source
Published analysis distinguishes the existing map litigation from possible challenges after the election.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri Independent examines the Proposition A campaign
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Jason Hancock
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Catherine Hanaway discusses Missouri's maps with KCUR
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Elizabeth Ruiz and Steve Kraske
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Vikram Amar examines lessons from the Missouri map orders
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Vikram David Amar
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Vikram Amar predicts another Supreme Court intervention
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Vikram David Amar
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Akhil and Vikram Amar analyze the federal-court conflict
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Akhil Amar and Vikram Amar
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Akhil and Vikram Amar defend Kavanaugh's refusal to intervene
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Akhil Amar and Vikram Amar
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Vikram Amar analyzes Missouri's federal challenge to the referendum
Relevant passage: Original article and publication date
About this source
The authors' analysis, predictions and reported comments are attributed to them. Historical forecasts are kept distinct from later court decisions.
- Author
- Vikram David Amar
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri Republicans ask federal court to revive gerrymandered map and block referendum
Relevant passage: Section headed "Timing issues"
Excerpt
"A late change to the ballot would risk not only their compliance with state and federal laws, but also the adequacy of votes from military and overseas voters"
About this source
Missouri Independent report by Rudi Keller, published by KCUR on September 16, 2026. It describes the friend-of-the-court brief the clerks' association filed with the Eighth Circuit on Tuesday, September 15, and the state's filing that day.
- Author
- Rudi Keller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri election workers warned switching maps this late is ‘practically impossible’ but the 8th Circuit ordered it anyway
Relevant passage: Paragraphs beginning "The Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities, which represents members from all 116 local election jurisdictions"
Excerpt
"At this point, it is practically impossible to revert to the HB 1 map due to the extensive time and cost required to reprint and distribute new ballots within statutory timelines"
About this source
Democracy Docket report of September 22, 2026 on election administrators' concerns after the Eighth Circuit's September 21 ruling. It quotes the friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities and comments from Boone County Clerk Brianna Lennon.
- Author
- Alexandra Hutzler
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Brief of Amicus Curiae Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities in Support of Appellants for Reversal of Temporary Restraining Order, Onder v. Von Glahn, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. filed Sept. 15, 2026)
Relevant passage: Conclusion, brief page 12
Excerpt
"At this point, it is practically impossible to revert to the HB 1 map due to the extensive time and cost required to reprint and distribute new ballots within statutory timelines."
About this source
Friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities in the Eighth Circuit appeal of the district court's September 8 temporary restraining order. It supports reversal of that order.
- Author
- Brianna L. Lennon and Evan Kennedy, counsel for amicus curiae
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
U.S. Supreme Court again blocks Missouri from using Trump-backed congressional map
Relevant passage: Section 'Referendum proponents forge ahead', paragraphs quoting Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan
Excerpt
"“Republican politicians have wasted enough taxpayer dollars on this effort when they should have been working to address the rising costs facing regular Missourians across this state,” Carnahan said."
About this source
St. Louis Public Radio's report on the U.S. Supreme Court's September 25, 2026 order blocking use of the 2025 congressional map, with reaction from Missouri officials, the referendum campaign and the Democratic Party chair.
- Author
- Jason Rosenbaum
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Supreme Court again rejects Trump-backed congressional map
Relevant passage: Article published September 25, 2026 5:22 PM CDT and updated; paragraph beginning "In a statement Friday evening"
Excerpt
"We are moving forward to vote NO on Proposition A."
About this source
Spectrum News report on the U.S. Supreme Court's September 25 order that quotes the statement People Not Politicians issued Friday evening through Executive Director Richard von Glahn.
- Author
- Associated Press, Spectrum News Staff and Gregg Palermo
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Redistricting battle ends: US Supreme Court says Missouri must use 2022 map
Relevant passage: Article posted September 25, 2026 5:50 PM CDT; paragraph reproducing the statement of Richard von Glahn
Excerpt
"We are done with corrupt politicians trying to force their map into effect outside the process outlined in the Missouri constitution."
About this source
Local news report on the U.S. Supreme Court's September 25 order that reproduces the statement People Not Politicians released through its executive director, Richard von Glahn.
- Author
- Andrew Lynch
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
NDRC on X: SCOTUS denied Missouri Republicans' third attempt
Excerpt
"Missouri Republicans tried to silence voters. Today, they lost."
About this source
Post from the @DemRedistrict account, which the organization's official website links, reacting to the U.S. Supreme Court's September 25 order.
- Author
- National Democratic Redistricting Committee
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Missouri Democratic Party on X: the so-called Missouri First maps have never been the law
Excerpt
"We are confident that this will soon be resolved and that Missourians will vote under the 2022 maps"
About this source
Post from the @MoDemParty account, which the party's official website links, on the day of the Eighth Circuit's ruling.
- Author
- Missouri Democratic Party
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: the Supreme Court has put this scheme to rest
Excerpt
"Tonight, after more than 305,000 Missourians demanded a say, the Supreme Court has put this shameful and unlawful scheme to rest."
About this source
Post from Cleaver's official congressional account, a government-verified account, responding to the U.S. Supreme Court's September 25 order.
- Author
- Emanuel Cleaver
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Rep. Wesley Bell on X: the people of Missouri didn't ask for this redistricting
Excerpt
"Once again, the Supreme Court ruled to protect the rights of Missourians."
About this source
Post from Bell's official congressional account, a government-verified account, responding to the U.S. Supreme Court's September 25 order.
- Author
- Wesley Bell
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries on X: Missouri Supreme Court decision and the U.S. Supreme Court
Excerpt
"The American people are watching."
About this source
Post from Jeffries's official congressional account, a government-verified account, about the request to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Supreme Court of Missouri's decision.
- Author
- Hakeem Jeffries
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Sen. Rick Brattin on X: statement on U.S. Supreme Court ruling
Excerpt
"Today's Supreme Court decision is a travesty for Missouri voters and for the integrity of our elections."
About this source
Post from Brattin's @RickBrattin account, which links to rickbrattin.com, reproducing his news release on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling.
- Author
- Rick Brattin
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Rep. Bob Onder on X: another disappointing decision by the Supreme Court
Excerpt
"Another disappointing decision by the Supreme Court."
About this source
Post from Onder's @BobOnderMO account, which describes him as the Republican congressman for Missouri's 3rd District, quoting a post by Nick Sortor about the ruling.
- Author
- Bob Onder
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Missouri Republican Party on X: we stand with Secretary of State Denny Hoskins
Excerpt
"Missouri's elections should not be thrown into chaos, and the votes of more than a million Missourians should not be disregarded."
About this source
Post from the @MissouriGOP account, which links to the party's official website, backing Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's court challenge to the Supreme Court of Missouri's order.
- Author
- Missouri Republican Party
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Rep. Jason Smith on X: applauds the Eighth Circuit for reinstating the 2025 Missouri First Map
Excerpt
"I applaud the Eighth Circuit for reinstating the 2025 Missouri First Map."
About this source
Post from the @JasonSmithMO account, which links to electjasonsmith.com and describes its owner as a Missouri congressman, quoting a post by SCOTUSwire about the Eighth Circuit's ruling.
- Author
- Jason Smith
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
JD Vance calls Missouri Supreme Court redistricting decision 'an affront to the democratic process'
Relevant passage: Article, updated September 14, 2026 2:21 PM CDT; the page carries the clip of Vance's answer, about 0:35 to 1:10 of the clip
Excerpt
"That, to me, is an affront to the democratic process."
About this source
KMBC report on Vice President JD Vance's answer to a KMBC reporter's question about the Missouri redistricting dispute, given after a speech in the Kansas City area on anti-fraud measures on Monday, September 14, 2026. The page includes the clip of the exchange.
- Author
- Chloe Godding, KMBC
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Governor Kehoe's Statement on SCOTUS's Congressional Map Decision (September 25, 2026)
Relevant passage: Governor's office official statement, September 25, 2026
Excerpt
"Nevertheless, Missouri will follow the Court’s order."
About this source
Official statement from the governor's office issued the day the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the federal orders requiring the 2025 map.
- Author
- Mike Kehoe
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Opposition to Application for Stay, State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, No. 26A388
Relevant passage: Brief, Introduction, pp. 1-3, filed September 23, 2026
Excerpt
"the State believes that voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest"
About this source
Brief filed by the Missouri Attorney General's Office for the State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins. It asks the Court to deny the stay, says the State believes voting under the 2025 map better advances the public interest, and says Missouri will not be able to run an orderly general election whichever way the Court rules.
- Author
- Louis J. Capozzi III, Solicitor General, Missouri Attorney General's Office
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Plaintiffs-Respondents' Brief in Opposition to Applicants' Renewed Emergency Application, No. 26A388
Relevant passage: Brief, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 23, 2026
Excerpt
"held that the Constitution forbids Missouri from using a different congressional map in the November general election than the one it used for the August primary"
About this source
Opposition brief filed for the plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit. It relies on the Eighth Circuit's September 21 holding that the Constitution forbids Missouri from using a different map in the general election than in the primary.
- Author
- Congressman Robert Onder, Richard Brattin, Patricia Thomas and Debra Havens (plaintiffs-respondents)
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388
Relevant passage: Application, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026
Excerpt
"That is the electoral disorder Purcell exists to prevent"
About this source
Application by People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn asking the Court to clarify that its September 10 stay covers the Eighth Circuit's permanent injunction or, alternatively, to stay the Eighth Circuit's September 21 ruling.
- Author
- Abha Khanna, Elias Law Group, counsel for People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt
Relevant passage: Article, published September 10, 2026 12:54 p.m. CDT and updated 8:15 p.m. CDT
Excerpt
"My Office is directing local election authorities to use the 2022 congressional map"
About this source
Report on the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 10 contempt hearing for Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, his statement directing local election authorities to use the 2022 map, and statements from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, attorney Chuck Hatfield and Rep. Bob Onder.
- Author
- Sarah Kellogg
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
In blow to Democrats, Missouri Supreme Court upholds map that targets Rep. Cleaver
Relevant passage: Article, May 12, 2026
Excerpt
"did not automatically prevent a GOP-friendly congressional map from going into effect"
About this source
Report that the Supreme Court of Missouri unanimously ruled on May 12, 2026 that submitting referendum signatures did not automatically prevent the 2025 map from going into effect.
- Author
- Jason Rosenbaum
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri redistricting referendum blocked by secretary of state, drawing lawsuit
Relevant passage: Article, August 4, 2026
Excerpt
"Whether they had one signature or 500 million signatures doesn’t really matter because they are unconstitutional"
About this source
Report that Secretary of State Denny Hoskins declared the referendum petition unconstitutional a few hours before polls closed in the August 4 primary, and that People Not Politicians sued in Cole County Circuit Court that night.
- Author
- Rudi Keller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Gerrymandered congressional map, initiative petition limits sent to Missouri governor
Relevant passage: Article, September 12, 2025
Excerpt
"The Senate voted 21-11 to give them final approval Friday afternoon"
About this source
Report on the Missouri Senate's September 12, 2025 final approval of the congressional map, the legislature's reconvening at President Donald Trump's urging, and People Not Politicians' announcement that it had filed a referendum.
- Author
- Jason Hancock
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
After hearing from Trump, Missouri GOP muscle gerrymandered map forward in state Senate
Relevant passage: Article, September 10, 2025
Excerpt
"The Missouri Senate must pass this Map now, AS IS"
About this source
Report that President Donald Trump demanded on social media on Tuesday, September 9, 2025 that the Missouri Senate pass the House-approved congressional map.
- Author
- Rudi Keller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map
Relevant passage: Article, September 25, 2026
Excerpt
"In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map"
About this source
Report on the Supreme Court's September 25 order, with the sequence of court actions since September 3, the filings of Missouri and the plaintiffs, and county election officials' account of absentee voting under the 2022 map.
- Author
- Rudi Keller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote
Relevant passage: Article, September 3, 2026
Excerpt
"Our office will move immediately to seek relief from (the United States Supreme Court)"
About this source
Report on the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, with reactions from Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, Richard von Glahn and President Donald Trump.
- Author
- Rudi Keller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Missouri redistricting ruling draws strong reaction from state leaders
Relevant passage: Article, updated September 10, 2026 9:25 p.m. CDT
Excerpt
"But the courts have ruled. I respect the courts. I respect the rule of law."
About this source
KMBC reports reactions to the Supreme Court's September 10 stay from Gov. Mike Kehoe and Missouri House Speaker Jon Patterson, with direct quotations from both.
- Author
- Brian Johnson, KMBC 9 News
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Brief of Amici Curiae Campaign Legal Center, ACLU of Missouri Foundation and ACLU Foundation, No. 26A388
Relevant passage: Brief, Summary of Argument, p. 3, filed September 23, 2026
Excerpt
"election administration has proceeded under the 2022 map, ballots have already been mailed, and voting has begun."
About this source
Amicus brief supporting the applicants, People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn, in their September 22 application to stay the Eighth Circuit's ruling.
- Author
- Campaign Legal Center, American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
US Supreme Court again blocks use of Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map
Relevant passage: Article, September 10, 2026
Excerpt
"The law is the law, the Missouri Constitution is clear as was the Missouri Supreme Court,"
About this source
Report on the Supreme Court's September 10 stay. It quotes Richard von Glahn's emailed statement, notes that the U.S. solicitor general joined Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in opposing the stay, and describes the order as unsigned with no publicly noted dissent.
- Author
- Jason Hancock
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Supreme Court blocks Republican-favored Missouri election map, ending legal whiplash
Relevant passage: Article, September 10, 2026, statement of Richard von Glahn
Excerpt
"The law is the law, the Missouri constitution is clear as was the Missouri Supreme Court"
About this source
ABC News reports the Supreme Court's September 10 stay and quotes a statement from Richard von Glahn, executive director of People Not Politicians.
- Author
- Devin Dwyer
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: a win for justice, a win for democracy
Excerpt
"A win for justice. A win for democracy. A win for the people of Missouri."
About this source
Post from Cleaver's official congressional account, a government-verified account, responding to the Supreme Court's September 10 order.
- Author
- Emanuel Cleaver
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Appeals court backs Missouri's gerrymandered map, but decision is put on hold
Relevant passage: Article, September 21, 2026
Excerpt
"Voters cast their primary ballots under this map, and they should be able to vote in the same districts for the general election."
About this source
Report on the Eighth Circuit's September 21 ruling, with statements from Sen. Rick Brattin and Richard von Glahn.
- Author
- Rudi Keller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Federal court says Missouri can't legally use 2022 voter map in November
Relevant passage: Article, September 21, 2026, quotation attributed to Sen. Rick Brattin in a statement
Excerpt
"That defies common sense and undermines the entire electoral process."
About this source
KOMU reports the Eighth Circuit ruling and quotes Sen. Rick Brattin's full statement. The Missouri Independent and KSHB report the first sentence of the same statement.
- Author
- KOMU 8 News
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Missouri Redistricting Showdown: Rep. Bob Onder on the 8th Circuit Ruling
Excerpt
"an excellent decision yesterday by the Eighth Circuit"
About this source
Radio interview posted by 97.1 FM Talk the morning after the Eighth Circuit's September 21 ruling. The host describes Onder as the lead plaintiff in the federal case. The quoted passage is Onder's answer about the primary election.
- Author
- Marc Cox, 97.1 FM Talk
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Intervenors-Respondents' Brief in Support of Applicant's Emergency Application for Stay, Hoskins v. Von Glahn, No. 26A304
Relevant passage: Brief p. 2, filed September 4, 2026
Excerpt
"It is difficult to imagine a judicial action that could sow more confusion among the electorate"
About this source
Brief filed by three Republican party committees as intervenors, supporting Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling. The docket lists the filing as the response of the Republican National Committee, et al.
- Author
- Republican National Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee and Missouri Republican State Committee
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A326
Relevant passage: Brief pp. 1, 15-16 and Conclusion, filed September 10, 2026
Excerpt
"This Court should deny the application for a stay."
About this source
Brief filed by the Solicitor General for the United States supporting the respondents, including Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins. It argues that the applicants lack appellate standing, are unlikely to succeed on appeal, and that the equities do not support a stay.
- Author
- D. John Sauer, Solicitor General
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Donald Trump says Missouri must be able to use the primary map
Relevant passage: Truth Social post 117209653242980598, published September 3, 2026 at 7:16 p.m. EDT
Excerpt
"Missouri must be able to use the map that was in effect just a couple of months ago, in the Primary."
About this source
Trump's own post on Truth Social, published hours after the Supreme Court of Missouri's ruling. The archived copy is an independent archive of his Truth Social posts.
- Author
- Donald J. Trump
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Statement from Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, CPA (September 3, 2026)
Relevant passage: Missouri Secretary of State news release, For Immediate Release: Sept. 3, 2026
Excerpt
"No court has ever rejected a congressional map that had already been used in an election, as the Missouri First Map was in the August primary."
About this source
News release issued after the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 rulings on the referendum petition on House Bill 1.
- Author
- Denny Hoskins
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Attorney General Catherine Hanaway on X: Missouri prepared to comply with Chief Judge Clark's order
Excerpt
"We maintain that changing the congressional map in between the primary and general elections is simply not feasible and profoundly unjust to Missouri voters."
About this source
Post from the attorney general's official account, published the evening Chief Judge Stephen Clark issued his temporary restraining order.
- Author
- Catherine Hanaway
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Gov. Mike Kehoe on X: Missouri First Map will be used in the general election
Excerpt
"With today marking the deadline for changes to the November ballot, the Missouri First Map will be used in the general election."
About this source
Post from the governor's official account, a government-verified account, published the evening Chief Judge Stephen Clark issued his temporary restraining order.
- Author
- Mike Kehoe
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Onder v. Missouri, No. 4:26-cv-01424-SRC, Memorandum and Order (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2026)
Relevant passage: Doc. 35, pp. 1-13
Excerpt
"Plaintiffs face irreparable harm absent a TRO because many Missouri voters would have to cast their general-election votes for candidates whom they had no role in nominating."
About this source
Temporary restraining order in the lawsuit filed by Rep. Bob Onder, Rick Brattin and two voters. It directs Missouri to use the 2025 map (House Bill 1) for the November 2026 general election. The Supreme Court stayed this order on September 10.
- Author
- Chief Judge Stephen R. Clark, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam)
Relevant passage: Opinion pp. 3-4 (holding), pp. 33-35 (Part VI) and pp. 35-40 (Stras, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)
Excerpt
"Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law."
About this source
Published per curiam opinion affirming Chief Judge Stephen Clark's temporary restraining order and directing entry of a permanent injunction requiring the 2025 map, with the injunction administratively stayed until September 28, 2026 at 5 p.m. Central time. Judge Stras concurred in part and dissented in part, writing that he would dismiss the appeal because People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn lack standing.
- Author
- Judges Loken, Stras and Smith, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc)
Relevant passage: Opinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14
Excerpt
"HB 1 is not the law and has never been the law."
About this source
Unanimous opinion reversing the Cole County Circuit Court. It holds that the referendum petition on House Bill 1 was legal, sufficient and timely, orders the Secretary of State to certify it for the November 2026 ballot, and enjoins him from using the 2025 map in the November 2026 general election unless voters approve it.
- Author
- Judge Ginger K. Gooch, Supreme Court of Missouri
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026)
Relevant passage: Order list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326
Excerpt
"The application for stay presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the Court is granted."
About this source
One-page unsigned order staying the district court's September 8 order pending the Eighth Circuit appeal and any timely petition for certiorari. The order gives no reasoning.
- Author
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn
Relevant passage: Proceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026
Excerpt
"Application (26A304) denied by Justice Kavanaugh."
About this source
The Court's docket records Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's September 4 application to stay the Supreme Court of Missouri's September 3 ruling, the responses and amicus briefs filed September 4 to 7, and Justice Kavanaugh's September 8 denial.
- Author
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Docket for No. 26A326, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al.
Relevant passage: Proceedings and Orders, entries dated September 9 and 10, 2026
Excerpt
"Application (26A326) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh."
About this source
The Court's docket records the September 9 stay application, the responses and briefs filed September 9 and 10, including the brief of the United States, and the September 10 order granting the stay.
- Author
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Docket for No. 26A388, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al.
Relevant passage: Proceedings and Orders, entries dated September 22 to September 25, 2026
Excerpt
"Application (26A388) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh."
About this source
The Court's docket records the September 22 stay application, the September 23 responses and amicus briefs, and the September 25 order granting the stay.
- Author
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Published
- Accessed
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/should-missouri-be-allowed-to-use-its-2025-congressional-map-in-the-2026-general-election
The Dispute Index. "Should Missouri be allowed to use its 2025 congressional map in the 2026 general election?". First published: 2026-09-26. Last updated: 2026-09-26. https://disputeindex.com/cases/should-missouri-be-allowed-to-use-its-2025-congressional-map-in-the-2026-general-election