The Missouri Supreme Court has unanimously blocked new congressional districts backed by former President Donald Trump from being used in the upcoming November election, ordering that voters must decide whether to uphold the map.
The decision on Thursday represents a significant setback for Republicans in the national redistricting landscape, as they had hoped the altered boundaries in Missouri would help them secure an additional House seat and maintain their narrow majority. Republican Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway stated her intention to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, calling the decision a "full-fledged constitutional crisis."
While the new districts were utilized in the August primaries, the state Supreme Court ruled they cannot be employed in the general election unless voters approve them. The court determined that the petition signatures submitted by opponents in December to challenge the map were valid. Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins had previously rejected the referendum, asserting that congressional redistricting laws are not subject to the referendum process. The Supreme Court overturned this decision, stating, "The referendum petition was legal, sufficient, and timely, and the secretary incorrectly concluded otherwise."
The court further clarified that the legislation containing the new districts "did not go into effect and will not go into effect unless and until approved by the voters." Consequently, the congressional map established after the 2020 census remains in effect until the November 2026 general election.
Hanaway, whose office defended Hoskins, characterized the ruling as an "unprecedented violation of federal law," noting that "never before in American history has a court overturned a congressional map after a primary and before a general election."
The Missouri Constitution does not explicitly permit referendum petitions for legislatively passed congressional redistricting laws. However, the Supreme Court interpreted a constitutional provision allowing referendums on "any act" of the Legislature as inclusive of congressional redistricting, rejecting arguments that federal law prohibits such petitions.
This ruling concludes a year of political maneuvering and legal challenges. In a separate decision on the same day, the Supreme Court also ruled that Hoskins had improperly rejected a petition for a ballot proposal aimed at making it harder for politicians to alter voter-enacted measures, ordering that proposal onto the November ballot.
Missouri currently holds six Republican and two Democratic representatives in the U.S. House. Following Trump's encouragement for Republicans to redraw districts to their advantage, Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe convened a special legislative session last year to significantly alter the 5th Congressional District, currently held by Democrat Emanuel Cleaver.
Cleaver, who ran unopposed in the August primary, has won the Kansas City-based district with at least 60% of the vote in the last two elections. Republican state Sen. Rick Brattin won a primary in the newly configured 5th District, which was extended eastward to incorporate rural Republican areas. An Associated Press estimate indicated that approximately 59% of the district's voters were new under the revised map.
Cleaver had delayed campaigning in some of the new rural areas, awaiting the court's decision, but had pledged to continue his reelection bid regardless of the outcome. Brattin, a Marine veteran and a founder of the conservative Missouri Freedom Caucus, had questioned Cleaver's ability to represent a broader district.
Congressional districts are typically redrawn each decade based on census data. However, Trump's push for a midterm advantage sparked a mid-decade redistricting conflict in over a dozen states, leading to numerous lawsuits, including a dozen in Missouri alone. Republicans had anticipated potentially gaining as many as 10 House seats nationwide through these efforts.
The Missouri Supreme Court's decision is one of a few nationally to go against Republican redistricting plans. Prior to this ruling, the court had dismissed claims that the special session was illegal, that mid-decade redistricting is prohibited, and that the new districts lacked sufficient compactness.
The citizens' group People Not Politicians led the referendum petition effort. Demonstrators gathered outside the state Supreme Court, advocating for their right to vote on the map. Supporters of the referendum argued that gerrymandering is a form of voter suppression.