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.

Missouri's proposed 2025 congressional map appears beside a Supreme Court order.
Missouri's proposed 2025 congressional map beside the Supreme Court's September 25, 2026, order concerning the map's use in the 2026 election.

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

Timeline

22 timeline entries on this page. Dates: September 9, 2025 to October 29, 2026

  1. September 2025

    1. 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.

    2. Missouri 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.

      [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)
  2. December 2025

    1. 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.

  3. May 2026

    1. 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.

      [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
  4. August 2026

    1. 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.

      [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.

  5. September 2026

    1. 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.

    2. Hoskins 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, 2026
    3. Vikram 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.

    4. Justice 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, 2026
    5. U.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.

    6. Supreme 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. CDT
    7. Amar 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.

      [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.

    8. Petition 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 demand
    9. Rhodes 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 statute
    10. Eighth 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.

    11. People 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, 2026
    12. Vikram 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 date
    13. U.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, 2026
    14. Vikram 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.

  6. October 2026

    1. 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.

    2. KCUR 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.
    3. 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

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)

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)

Response record

Responses

Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.

14 matching responses. First 6 shown initially. Newest first.

  1. 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."
    Condemned

    Responding 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 Glahn
    Supreme 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, 2026
    US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026

    Why 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.

  2. 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 excused

    Responding 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, 2026
    US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026
    Federal court says Missouri can't legally use 2022 voter map in NovemberArticle, September 21, 2026, quotation attributed to Sen. Rick Brattin in a statement

    Why 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.

  3. Bob OnderU.S. Representative for Missouri's 3rd District and lead plaintiff in the federal lawsuit, posting on his @BobOnderMO accountDirectly 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. 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 excused

    Case 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, 2026
    US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026
    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, 2026

    Why 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.

  4. Emanuel CleaverU.S. Representative for Missouri's 5th District, posting on his official @repcleaver accountDirectly 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. 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."
    Condemned

    Case 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 post
    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
    US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026

    Why 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.

  5. Mike KehoeGovernor of Missouri, in an official statement from the governor's officeDirectly 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.

    "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 excused

    Case 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, 2026
    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
    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)

    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.

  6. Catherine HanawayAttorney General of Missouri, whose office filed the brief for the State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in No. 26A388Directly involved

    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. 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 excused

    Case 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, 2026
    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)
    Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388 · People Not PoliticiansApplication, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026
    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

    Why 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.

View all 14 responsesShow fewer responses
  1. 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 excused

    Responding 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, 2026
    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)
    US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map · Missouri IndependentArticle, September 25, 2026

    Why 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.

  2. 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."
    Condemned

    Responding 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.

    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

    Why 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.

  3. 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 excused

    Responding 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 statement

    Why 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.

  4. 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."
    Condemned

    Responding 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 Glahn

    Why 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.

  5. 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."
    Condemned

    Responding 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 stay
    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
    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. CDT

    Why 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.

  6. 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 excused

    Case 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)
    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
    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. CDT
    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, 2026

    Why 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.

  7. 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 excused

    Case 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)
    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
    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
    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)

    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.

  8. Denny HoskinsMissouri Secretary of State, the state's chief election official and a defendant in the state and federal casesDirectly involved

    Before 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 excused

    Case 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, 2026
    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. CDT

    Why 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.

Sources

(60)

Original text

People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026)

People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388: per curiam order granting stay (September 25, 2026) (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of the United StatesSlip opinion pp. 1-5 (per curiam), September 25, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

FOX 2 reports voters' damages demand over the Missouri map referendum (opens in a new tab)FOX 2 original reporting syndicated by AOL; filing date, proposed class and statutory damages demand
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Missouri Independent reports petition-signers' damages suit against Hoskins

Missouri Independent reports petition-signers' damages suit against Hoskins (opens in a new tab)Complete original news brief, filing date and damages/class allegations
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Analysis

Rhodes discusses limits on the proposed Hoskins damages class

Rhodes discusses limits on the proposed Hoskins damages class (opens in a new tab)Original interview with Charles Rhodes; discussion of aggrieved persons under the Missouri damages statute
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

KCUR answers voter questions about Missouri election challenges

KCUR answers voter questions about Missouri election challenges (opens in a new tab)Anna Neumann; questions about the maps and possible litigation.
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Missouri Independent examines the Proposition A campaign

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Analysis

Vikram Amar predicts another Supreme Court intervention

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Analysis

Akhil and Vikram Amar analyze the federal-court conflict

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Analysis

Akhil and Vikram Amar defend Kavanaugh's refusal to intervene

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Analysis

Vikram Amar analyzes Missouri's federal challenge to the referendum

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Missouri Republicans ask federal court to revive gerrymandered map and block referendum

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Missouri election workers warned switching maps this late is ‘practically impossible’ but the 8th Circuit ordered it anyway

Missouri election workers warned switching maps this late is ‘practically impossible’ but the 8th Circuit ordered it anyway (opens in a new tab)Paragraphs beginning "The Missouri Association of County Clerks and Election Authorities, which represents members from all 116 local election jurisdictions"
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

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)

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

U.S. Supreme Court again blocks Missouri from using Trump-backed congressional map

U.S. Supreme Court again blocks Missouri from using Trump-backed congressional map (opens in a new tab) · St. Louis Public RadioSection 'Referendum proponents forge ahead', paragraphs quoting Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Supreme Court again rejects Trump-backed congressional map (opens in a new tab)Article published September 25, 2026 5:22 PM CDT and updated; paragraph beginning "In a statement Friday evening"
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Redistricting battle ends: US Supreme Court says Missouri must use 2022 map (opens in a new tab)Article posted September 25, 2026 5:50 PM CDT; paragraph reproducing the statement of Richard von Glahn
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

NDRC on X: SCOTUS denied Missouri Republicans' third attempt (opens in a new tab) · National Democratic Redistricting CommitteeFull X post, published September 25, 2026 at 22:44 UTC (5:44 p.m. CDT)

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

Missouri Democratic Party on X: the so-called Missouri First maps have never been the law (opens in a new tab) · Missouri Democratic PartyFull X post with attached image, published September 22, 2026 at 00:42 UTC (7:42 p.m. CDT on September 21)

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

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: the Supreme Court has put this scheme to rest (opens in a new tab) · Emanuel CleaverFull X post, published September 25, 2026 at 23:53 UTC (6:53 p.m. CDT), quoting an Associated Press post

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

Rep. Wesley Bell on X: the people of Missouri didn't ask for this redistricting (opens in a new tab) · Wesley BellFull X post, published September 26, 2026 at 01:07 UTC (8:07 p.m. CDT on September 25), quoting an Associated Press post

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

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries on X: Missouri Supreme Court decision and the U.S. Supreme Court (opens in a new tab) · Hakeem JeffriesFull X post, published September 10, 2026 at 02:08 UTC (10:08 p.m. EDT on September 9)

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

Sen. Rick Brattin on X: statement on U.S. Supreme Court ruling (opens in a new tab) · 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)

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

Rep. Bob Onder on X: another disappointing decision by the Supreme Court (opens in a new tab) · Bob OnderFull X post, published September 25, 2026 at 23:53 UTC (6:53 p.m. CDT)

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

Missouri Republican Party on X: we stand with Secretary of State Denny Hoskins (opens in a new tab) · Missouri Republican PartyFull X post with attached image, published September 6, 2026 at 17:19 UTC (12:19 p.m. CDT)

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

Rep. Jason Smith on X: applauds the Eighth Circuit for reinstating the 2025 Missouri First Map (opens in a new tab) · Jason SmithFull X post, published September 21, 2026 at 22:47 UTC (5:47 p.m. CDT)

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'

JD Vance calls Missouri Supreme Court redistricting decision 'an affront to the democratic process' (opens in a new tab)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
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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)

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Opposition to Application for Stay, State of Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, No. 26A388

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388

Emergency Application for Stay, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388 (opens in a new tab) · People Not PoliticiansApplication, Introduction, pp. 1-2, filed September 22, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt

Hoskins agrees to use 2022 congressional map as Missouri Supreme Court finds him in contempt (opens in a new tab) · St. Louis Public RadioArticle, published September 10, 2026 12:54 p.m. CDT and updated 8:15 p.m. CDT
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

In blow to Democrats, Missouri Supreme Court upholds map that targets Rep. Cleaver

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Missouri redistricting referendum blocked by secretary of state, drawing lawsuit

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Gerrymandered congressional map, initiative petition limits sent to Missouri governor

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

After hearing from Trump, Missouri GOP muscle gerrymandered map forward in state Senate

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

US Supreme Court again blocks Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Missouri redistricting ruling draws strong reaction from state leaders

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

US Supreme Court again blocks use of Missouri's gerrymandered congressional map

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Supreme Court blocks Republican-favored Missouri election map, ending legal whiplash

Supreme Court blocks Republican-favored Missouri election map, ending legal whiplash (opens in a new tab) · ABC NewsArticle, September 10, 2026, statement of Richard von Glahn
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original post

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: a win for justice, a win for democracy

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver on X: a win for justice, a win for democracy (opens in a new tab) · 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 stay

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Reporting

Federal court says Missouri can't legally use 2022 voter map in November

Federal court says Missouri can't legally use 2022 voter map in November (opens in a new tab)Article, September 21, 2026, quotation attributed to Sen. Rick Brattin in a statement
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Interview

Missouri Redistricting Showdown: Rep. Bob Onder on the 8th Circuit Ruling

Missouri Redistricting Showdown: Rep. Bob Onder on the 8th Circuit Ruling (opens in a new tab)Video, about 4:53 to 5:12, interview with host Marc Cox on 97.1 FM Talk (St. Louis), posted September 22, 2026

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

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A326

Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents, People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A326 (opens in a new tab) · United States Department of JusticeBrief pp. 1, 15-16 and Conclusion, filed September 10, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Official statement

Donald Trump says Missouri must be able to use the primary map

Donald Trump says Missouri must be able to use the primary map (opens in a new tab) · Donald TrumpTruth Social post 117209653242980598, published September 3, 2026 at 7:16 p.m. EDT
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Official statement

Statement from Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, CPA (September 3, 2026)

Statement from Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, CPA (September 3, 2026) (opens in a new tab) · Denny HoskinsMissouri Secretary of State news release, For Immediate Release: Sept. 3, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original post

Attorney General Catherine Hanaway on X: Missouri prepared to comply with Chief Judge Clark's order

Attorney General Catherine Hanaway on X: Missouri prepared to comply with Chief Judge Clark's order (opens in a new tab) · Catherine HanawayFull X post, published 2026-09-08 22:52 UTC (5:52 p.m. CDT)

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

Gov. Mike Kehoe on X: Missouri First Map will be used in the general election (opens in a new tab) · Mike KehoeFull X post, published 2026-09-08 23:07 UTC (6:07 p.m. CDT)

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)

Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam)

Onder v. Missouri, No. 26-2797 (8th Cir. Sept. 21, 2026) (per curiam) (opens in a new tab) · 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)
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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)

von Glahn v. Hoskins, No. SC101805 (Mo. Sept. 3, 2026) (en banc) (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of MissouriOpinion, footnote 8 and pp. 12-14
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026)

Order in pending case 26A326, People Not Politicians v. Onder (September 10, 2026) (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of the United StatesOrder list of September 10, 2026, No. 26A326
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn

Docket for No. 26A304, Denny Hoskins v. Richard Von Glahn (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 4 to September 8, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Docket for No. 26A326, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al.

Docket for No. 26A326, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 9 and 10, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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.

Docket for No. 26A388, People Not Politicians, et al. v. Robert Onder, et al. (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of the United StatesProceedings and Orders, entries dated September 22 to September 25, 2026
Read source (opens in a new tab)

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
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Case updates

Missouri's map fight after the Supreme Court order

We'll email you if anyone seeks further Supreme Court review, when Missouri voters decide Proposition A, or if state officials respond to the order.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

The newsletter

Follow disputes like this one.

New cases and significant updates to the record, in your inbox. Free.

You’ll confirm your subscription on Substack.

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