The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a congressional map favored by Republicans for the upcoming midterm elections in Missouri. The court found that the map adheres to the Constitution and federal law.
In a panel ruling, three judges stated, “This Court holds that Missouri’s current plan to use the 2022 map in the November 2026 general election violates the Constitution. Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law. We affirm the district court and remand for entry of a permanent injunction.”
The decision was penned by Judge James B. Loken, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, alongside Judge David R. Stras and Judge Justin D. Smith, who both received their nominations from President Donald Trump.
The Supreme Court had previously blocked a redistricting map that would have altered Missouri’s eight House districts. This occurred shortly after Justice Brett Kavanaugh opted not to hear an emergency appeal related to the case.
The appellate panel advised the lower court to implement a temporary stay until 5 p.m. CT on September 28. The panel emphasized the importance of a stay to prevent immediate implementation of the 2025 map before the Supreme Court could handle any appeal.
Newsweek reached out to the Supreme Court on Monday for comment.
The ruling was met with partial dissent from Judge Stras, who highlighted issues such as a probable violation of Article I, section 2 of the Constitution. Stras asserted, “But I would not even get that far because People Not Politicians and Richard von Glahn lack standing. For that reason, I would dismiss the appeal.”
Following this decision, District Judge Stephen Clark in Missouri’s Eastern District issued a permanent injunction against the use of any map other than that from 2025.
The shift in Missouri’s map prompted confusion and uncertainty regarding which map voters would use and vote with in the midterms.
People Not Politicians challenged Missouri’s new map, and successfully appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, emphasizing that the Missouri constitution remains clear, supported by a significant public action involving over 305,000 voters.
Democratic Congressman Christian Menefee from Texas expressed outrage on X, declaring, “This is outrageous. The Supreme Court already stepped in twice to block Missouri’s rigged map. Ballots are already in the mail. Now, at the 11th hour, an appeals court is letting Missouri Republicans force that rigged map on voters anyway. All to erase a Kansas City district and silence Black and Brown voters. Catastrophic for confidence in our elections.”
Implications of the New Decision
Absentee ballots have reached military personnel and overseas citizens using the 2022 maps. By Tuesday, all voters can access absentee ballots as per state law.
The panel remarked, “For all Missouri voters not covered by UOCAVA [Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act], absentee ballots may be requested and cast starting September 22, 2026. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 115.281.1. That deadline has not yet arrived, and thus general absentee voting has not yet begun. Accordingly, the September 22, 2026, absentee ballot commencement date does not moot this case.”
Neama Rahmani, former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, conveyed to Newsweek, “Missouri is a total mess. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the 2025 map was unlawful because it was not approved by the voters. Normally a state Supreme Court is the ultimate decision maker when it comes to state law, but now a federal circuit court has ruled that changing back to old 2022 map violates federal law because congressional districts can’t be changed between primary and general elections.” Rahmani added, “There is also a reverse-Purcell issue, with the federal appellate court maintaining that the new 2025 map is effectively the status quo and should not be changed shortly before an election. Some ballots have already been mailed and a number of Missourians have voted. Had the Missouri Secretary of State simply put the issue of the new map to the voters instead of deciding that it was legally unnecessary, we wouldn’t be in the mess. Instead, the U.S. Supreme Court will almost certainly have to step in and resolve this dispute between state and federal law.”
Leave a Reply