Missouri Supreme Court blocks gerrymandered congressional map, orders referendum vote

By Rudi Keller 

Missouri Independent

Missourians will vote in November on the gerrymandered congressional map muscled through the Legislature in 2025, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Thursday.

The decision puts a congressional plan before voters for the first time since 1922 and affirms that the Missouri Constitution’s provision allowing voter-initiated referenda applies to redistricting plans as well as almost all other legislation.

“Because the plain language of… the Missouri Constitution authorizes a referendum as to ‘any act of the general assembly’ and no exception applies, the referendum petition was legal, sufficient, and timely,” Judge Ginger Gooch wrote in the unanimous opinion. “This court reverses the circuit court’s judgment.”

The court not only put the referendum on the ballot, it ordered Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to use the district lines drawn in 2022 for this year’s general election.

“The secretary and all of those acting in concert with him are restrained and enjoined from implementing, using, or mandating the use of the congressional redistricting (plan from 2025) for the November 2026 general election or at any other time thereafter unless and until (the act) is approved by the voters at the November 2026 general election and takes effect 30 days thereafter,” Gooch wrote.

The court’s decision reverses the ruling of Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green, who found that the U.S. Constitution’s provisions on elections delegate sole power over congressional redistricting plans to state legislatures. That tie to the U.S. Constitution will be the basis of an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said in a news release Thursday.

“Never before in American history has a court overturned a congressional map after a primary and before a general election. This unprecedented decision clearly violates federal law and has thrust our state into a full‑fledged constitutional crisis,” Hanaway said. “Our office will move immediately to seek relief from SCOTUS. We are confident that the federal courts will not allow every Missouri voter to be disenfranchised—which is what today’s decision does.”

The political action committee People Not Politicians gathered more than 300,000 signatures to force the referendum.

“This is what democracy looks like, the people of Missouri demanded a voice, and the court just confirmed what we’ve been saying all along. People, not politicians, will have the final say,” said Richard von Glahn, executive director, in a news release. “This victory reaches beyond Missouri. In a year when map-drawing has become a national weapon, courts across the country are watching what happens here. A Missouri win for the referendum is a signal that the people still hold the power.”

That means the boundaries of Districts 1 through 6 will change, with the most dramatic difference in the 5th District drawn last year to help Republicans take a seventh seat in the state’s delegation.

The results of the Aug. 4 primary, held in the boundaries of the now-suspended map, were not altered by the decision. It will be up to the nominated candidates to determine what they will do in response to the altered lines.

The decision closes out most of the litigation surrounding the referendum. Several new precedents have been set that upheld the broad power of a governor to call lawmakers into session; upheld the power of lawmakers to revise congressional lines at any time; and, in the final ruling, showed the wide scope of the referendum power.

In all three of those instances, the court looked to the text of the constitution and the common meaning of the words used. And, in each case, what the absence of particular words meant.

For the governor and the Legislature, the court found nothing in the Constitution that would restrict their authority to engage in redistricting at any time. 

And the same held true for the referendum power. The Constitution doesn’t say a redistricting plan is exempt from a referendum so that means it is allowed, the court ruled.

“Because no such explicit exception for legislation drawing new congressional districts is found anywhere in the Missouri Constitution, the broad default language… subjecting ‘any act of the general assembly’ to referendum applies,” Gooch wrote.

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com.