In Victory for Missouri Voters, Lawful Congressional Map Will Be Used in November, Voters to Decide Referendum

WASHINGTON — Today, in People Not Politicians v. Onder, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay of a district court’s order blocking use of Missouri’s lawful congressional map. The effect of the Supreme Court’s order is to ensure that Missouri voters will vote under the state’s lawful 2022 map this November instead of the gerrymandered map passed by the state legislature in 2025. This is the latest — and hopefully the final — update in a series of fast-moving disputes in the past week about Missouri’s congressional map.

Last week, the Missouri Supreme Court unanimously upheld Missourians’ right to hold a referendum on the state’s gerrymandered 2025 congressional map, and held that until that map is voted on and approved by the people of Missouri, the prior congressional map must remain in effect. Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay that decision from Missouri’s high court, and on Monday, Justice Kavanaugh rejected that request, leaving in place the Missouri Supreme Court ruling.

As a result of these decisions, Missourians will be able to vote in the 2026 midterm election under a lawful congressional map and exercise their right to referendum either to approve or reject the gerrymandered 2025 map. Final resolution of the people’s right to hold a referendum comes eight months after Missouri voters collected more than twice the petition signatures needed to hold a referendum and weeks before the November general election.

Campaign Legal Center, the ACLU of Missouri and the ACLU Voting Rights Project (VRP) filed amicus briefs in both cases at the U.S. Supreme Court this week.

“Today’s decision ensures Missouri voters will not be forced to vote under a gerrymandered map pushed through by the state legislature last year and then cynically imposed on voters by the secretary of state, in violation of the state constitution,” said Mark Gaber, senior director of redistricting at Campaign Legal Center. “Voters deserve to have their voices heard and to have fair representation in Congress. The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that principle, and now, so has the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“The chaos leading up to this conclusion was unnecessary and intentional, designed by state actors in D.C. and carried out by politicians in Jefferson City with the goal of diluting any Missouri voice who does not align with a single party or a president,” said Gillian Wilcox, director of litigation and policy for the ACLU of Missouri. “This decision ensures the Missourians, not politicians, will have the final say to either approve or reject these gerrymandered maps at the ballot box.”

“The people of Missouri will finally have a chance in November to vote against the State’s attempted gerrymander, which seeks to deprive voters of the opportunity to choose who represents them in Congress,” said Ming Cheung, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Voting Rights Project. “Missouri never should have tried to engage in this unlawful and discriminatory redistricting in the first place, but the courts rightly determined that the new map cannot take effect until Missouri voters have had a say.”

CLC submitted two amicus briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court in the last week regarding the Missouri map. The first, in Hoskins v. Von Glahn, pointed out that a century of U.S. Supreme Court precedent makes clear that the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives states the power to draw maps according to the laws of the state, and that includes the right of citizens to vote on those maps by referendum if the state constitution permits it, as Missouri’s does. In fact, it was the secretary’s request to hold the 2026 election under an unlawful map that would violate the Elections Clause, not the unanimous ruling of the Missouri Supreme Court.

The second, in People Not Politicians v. Onder, explained that the federal district court’s order preventing the use of any map other than the unlawful 2025 map was incorrect because the district court lacked jurisdiction, the order violated federal law, and the order violated the Purcell principle by injecting further chaos into Missouri’s elections less than two months before the general election.

Follow the latest updates via Campaign Legal Center’s case page.

###

The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center advances democracy through law. We safeguard the freedom to vote, defend voters’ right to know who is spending money to influence elections, and work to ensure public trust in our elected officials.

Learn more about CLC. Don't miss out on our latest resources: Subscribe to President Trevor Potter's newsletter on LinkedIn or email and tune in to the latest season of our award-winning podcast, Democracy Decoded.