The Catch.A permanent record of checked claims
SeriesThe Missouri House mapSeptember 3, 2026

Missouri Supreme Court · September 3, 2026

Missouri's highest court says the new U.S. House map never became law and sends it to a November vote

The ruling is unanimous. The November 3 House election uses the 2022 districts whether or not voters approve House Bill 1, unless a federal court steps in. As of September 8 none had: the state's stay request sat with the U.S. Supreme Court and two new federal suits sat in St. Louis. The referendum is on the ballot as Proposition A.

The storyJust the factsShow the work
UnanimousMissouri Supreme Court, September 3
2022 mapfor November, whatever the referendum
Prop. Acertified for the ballot September 8, the court's deadline
Sept. 1945 days before November 3, overseas ballots

Story updated 2026-09-08.

This story rests on the Missouri Supreme Court's September 3 opinion in von Glahn v. Hoskins, the court's own summary of that opinion, the September 3 mandate and September 4 stay denial, Missouri's constitution, House Bill 1 as enrolled, the House and Senate journals, Maggard v. State, two companion rulings issued the same day, the attorney general's U.S. Supreme Court stay application and the challenger's opposition, the U.S. Supreme Court docket, the attorney general's September 3 statement, Secretary Hoskins's September 3 statement, the four friend-of-the-court briefs filed September 7, the federal district court's September 4 filing list, the secretary's September 8 certificate and ballot-measures page, the earlier Missouri rulings on this map (Luther, Healey, Maggard, the ballot-title appeal, and the NAACP case), Boone County's clerk's sworn statement from the state's own appendix, and coverage checked against those records. Missouri's court website could not be opened directly, so the opinion text is read from the appendix the attorney general filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. The court's own file is at the Supreme Court of Missouri opinion path for SC101805. Maggard and the companion rulings are public copies hosted by Justia.

The ruling

What happened

On September 3, 2026, the Supreme Court of Missouri reversed a Cole County judgment that had upheld Secretary of State Denny Hoskins's rejection of a referendum on House Bill 1. Judge Ginger K. Gooch wrote the opinion. The opinion says all concur. The court's own communications summary, which is not part of the opinion, calls that a unanimous decision.21

A referendum is a statewide vote on a law the legislature already passed, after people gather enough signatures to put it on the ballot. House Bill 1 is the 2025 act that would repeal Missouri's 2022 U.S. House districts and draw new ones, effective beginning with the election of the 120th Congress.826

  • A referendum is a statewide vote on a law the legislature already passed, after people gather enough signatures to put it on the ballot. House Bill 1 is the 2025 act that would repeal Missouri's 2022 U.S. House districts and draw new ones, effective beginning with the election of the 120th Congress.826

The court asked one legal question: does the Missouri Constitution allow a referendum on a congressional redistricting act? There was no dispute that referendum petition 2026-R004 was filed on time, or that it had the number of signatures the constitution requires: Hoskins left both objections out of his certificate, so the court treated them as conceded. Organizers submitted boxes said to hold more than 300,000 signatures on December 9, 2025. That is the count submitted, not a count of signatures verified as valid.2

Hoskins issued a "Certificate of Insufficiency of Petition" at about 4 p.m. on August 4, 2026, about one hour before the statutory deadline. The certificate said the Missouri Constitution does not authorize a referendum on congressional redistricting plans passed by the General Assembly. Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel R. Green upheld that certificate. The Supreme Court reversed.2

The court held that article III, section 49 of the Missouri Constitution subjects "any act of the general assembly" to referendum, that House Bill 1 is such an act, and that no exception applies. Because the petition was legal, sufficient, and timely, House Bill 1 is not the law and has never been the law. The 2022 congressional districts remain in full force for the November 2026 general election.2

The court's review of the certificate was limited to the single reason Hoskins stated: that the constitution does not allow a referendum on a congressional map. The opinion says the secretary may not attach and incorporate an attorney general document as the reason. Other arguments, including claimed federal-law violations, were treated as waived for that review.2

The opinion says it reaffirms Maggard, the court's May 12 ruling in a suit by two voters. Maggard has two halves, and both matter here. First: filing a referendum petition does not by itself suspend a law, so House Bill 1 stayed in operation while the secretary's review was pending, which is why the August primary ran on its lines. Second: if the petition turns out to be legal, sufficient, and timely, the certification relates back to the filing date, so House Bill 1 did not take effect on December 11 and was referred to the people as of December 9. September 3 supplied the "if."10

  • The opinion says it reaffirms Maggard, the court's May 12 ruling in a suit by two voters. Maggard has two halves, and both matter here. First: filing a referendum petition does not by itself suspend a law, so House Bill 1 stayed in operation while the secretary's review was pending, which is why the August primary ran on its lines. Second: if the petition turns out to be legal, sufficient, and timely, the certification relates back to the filing date, so House Bill 1 did not take effect on December 11 and was referred to the people as of December 9. September 3 supplied the "if."10
  • 10Maggard v. State, SC101581simply filing a referendum petition does not automatically suspend a legislative actdid not take effect on December 11

The court ordered Hoskins to issue a certificate of sufficiency for petition 2026-R004, place the referendum on the November 2026 ballot, and take every step needed to do that before September 8, 2026. It barred him, and anyone acting with him, from using House Bill 1's districts for November or later unless and until voters approve the bill and it takes effect 30 days after that election.2

The constitution's referendum clause says the people reserve power to approve or reject by referendum any act of the general assembly, except as later provided. A measure referred to the people takes effect when approved by a majority of the votes cast on it, and not otherwise.26

  • 26Missouri Constitutionreject by referendum any act of the general assembly, except as hereinafter provided.

How the map got here

Where this sits

The General Assembly passed House Bill 1 on September 12, 2025. The enrolled bill is marked truly agreed to and finally passed. If it became effective, it would repeal the 2022 districts and establish new ones beginning with the election of the 120th Congress. Governor Mike Kehoe signed it on September 28, 2025. Organizers submitted a referendum form on September 29. The secretary approved it for circulation. On December 9 they submitted 691 boxes purporting to contain more than 300,000 signatures.289

The House journal records that House Bill 1 was read the third time and passed, 90 ayes to 65 noes. The Senate journal records that it was read the third time and finally passed, 21 yeas to 11 nays.2829

Cole County entered judgment on August 19, 2026, upholding the secretary's certificate. That date is in the table of contents of the appendix the state filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. The judgment pages in that appendix have no readable text layer. The second volume includes Hoskins's certificate of insufficiency at 597a; those pages also have no readable text layer, so the opinion's quotation of the certificate is the record.1415

how the calendar was counted

The ruling is dated September 3, 2026, in the court's opinion and mandate. September 8 minus September 3 is 5 days. Federal law, 52 U.S.C. 20302, requires overseas and military ballots 45 days before the election. November 3, 2026 minus 45 days is September 19. The stay application names September 19. The eighth Tuesday before November 3, 2026 is September 8, the late-ballot date in RSMo 115.125.

The August 4 primary used House Bill 1's lines. The court still held that those lines never took effect, because a sufficient referendum petition filed on December 9 suspended the bill. The confusion of holding a primary under one map and a general election under another is, in the court's account, a product of the secretary's wait, not a reason to ignore the constitution.2

  • The August 4 primary used House Bill 1's lines. The court still held that those lines never took effect, because a sufficient referendum petition filed on December 9 suspended the bill. The confusion of holding a primary under one map and a general election under another is, in the court's account, a product of the secretary's wait, not a reason to ignore the constitution.2

September 3 was the sixth Missouri ruling on this map, and the first that went against it. On March 24, in Luther, the court held that the state constitution does not bar redrawing congressional districts mid-decade. On April 30 the Court of Appeals held that parts of Hoskins's ballot summary for the referendum, including the word "gerrymandered," were "insufficient and unfair," and sent it back for rewriting. On May 12, in Healey, the court upheld the map itself against claims that its districts were not compact or contiguous, and the same day decided Maggard. On May 27 the court rejected the NAACP's challenge to the governor's special session. A federal suit by the General Assembly to stop the petition was dismissed in December, and the state's motion to revisit that was denied May 11. None of those rulings decided whether the map could be referred to the voters; that was the one question left, and the one Hoskins lost.2223242514

  • September 3 was the sixth Missouri ruling on this map, and the first that went against it. On March 24, in Luther, the court held that the state constitution does not bar redrawing congressional districts mid-decade. On April 30 the Court of Appeals held that parts of Hoskins's ballot summary for the referendum, including the word "gerrymandered," were "insufficient and unfair," and sent it back for rewriting. On May 12, in Healey, the court upheld the map itself against claims that its districts were not compact or contiguous, and the same day decided Maggard. On May 27 the court rejected the NAACP's challenge to the governor's special session. A federal suit by the General Assembly to stop the petition was dismissed in December, and the state's motion to revisit that was denied May 11. None of those rulings decided whether the map could be referred to the voters; that was the one question left, and the one Hoskins lost.2223242514

What the map does, in the court's own description from Healey: the 2025 map splits five counties where the 2022 map split nine, and splits two municipalities that sit wholly inside one county where the 2022 map split 22. It puts all of Clay County and the Northland, the part of Kansas City north of the Missouri River, into District 6. District 4, majority rural under the 2022 map, becomes majority urban. And it draws a district line through part of Troost Avenue in Kansas City, a street the court called a well-known racial dividing line; the challengers in that case did not claim the map was racially discriminatory.24

  • 24Healey v. State, May 12The 2025 Map split five counties, while the 2022 Map split nine counties.The 2022 Map split 22 municipalities contained wholly within a single county, while the 2025 Map splits only two of these municipalities.district 4 was a majority-rural district in the 2022 Map but became majorityurban in the 2025 MapAppellants did not allege the 2025 Map was racially discriminatory

ABC, using an Associated Press dispatch, wrote that the new lines were drawn after President Donald Trump urged Republicans to redraw districts, and that Governor Mike Kehoe called a special session to reconfigure the Kansas City-based 5th District held by Democrat Emanuel Cleaver. Those political facts are not in the opinion. They are the coverage's account of how the bill arrived.42

The House-map ruling was one of three ballot rulings the court issued together on September 3. In Harris v. Hoskins, SC101806, an initiative petition later called Amendment 6, the court used the same certificate reasoning and ordered the secretary to issue a certificate of sufficiency and place that measure on the ballot before September 8, 2026. The merits of Amendment 6 are a second story. In People Not Politicians v. Hoskins, SC101801, the court vacated the Cole County judgment and dismissed the case as moot because the secretary's August 4 certificate was not based on a lack of signatures.1112

  • The House-map ruling was one of three ballot rulings the court issued together on September 3. In Harris v. Hoskins, SC101806, an initiative petition later called Amendment 6, the court used the same certificate reasoning and ordered the secretary to issue a certificate of sufficiency and place that measure on the ballot before September 8, 2026. The merits of Amendment 6 are a second story. In People Not Politicians v. Hoskins, SC101801, the court vacated the Cole County judgment and dismissed the case as moot because the secretary's August 4 certificate was not based on a lack of signatures.1112

Since summer 2025, ten states have changed their congressional maps: Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures tracker as updated September 1.37

  • Since summer 2025, ten states have changed their congressional maps: Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures tracker as updated September 1.37

The state argues the U.S. Constitution's Elections Clause leaves congressional maps to the legislature, that a petition signed by approximately 3.3 percent of the state's voters should not suspend an enacted map, and that late changes to election rules are disfavored. It cites Purcell v. Gonzalez. The challenger's opposition answers that the U.S. Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction because the Missouri court's holding is a question of state law.56

The state points to Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, where the U.S. Supreme Court said a district court "improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign" and stayed a Texas order. The application says Missouri's disruption dwarfs any case where that Court invoked Purcell-related concerns. The opposition answers that Purcell cautions federal courts against late changes, and that the state concedes the Court has never applied it to a state court's reading of state law.3856

  • The state points to Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, where the U.S. Supreme Court said a district court "improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign" and stayed a Texas order. The application says Missouri's disruption dwarfs any case where that Court invoked Purcell-related concerns. The opposition answers that Purcell cautions federal courts against late changes, and that the state concedes the Court has never applied it to a state court's reading of state law.3856

Voters, clerks, and the House

Who feels it

Missouri currently has six Republicans and two Democrats in the U.S. House, the Associated Press wrote in the dispatch ABC carried; that is one report, not two. The new map was drawn to help Republicans win an additional seat by stretching Cleaver's Kansas City district into rural Republican areas. About 59 percent of that reshaped district's voters were new, according to an AP estimate whose method AP did not publish in that story.42

The House's own gallery page, last updated September 2, lists 218 Republicans, 214 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 2 vacancies. That is the national arithmetic as the House records it. It is not a forecast.34

  • The House's own gallery page, last updated September 2, lists 218 Republicans, 214 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 2 vacancies. That is the national arithmetic as the House records it. It is not a forecast.34

If the September 3 order stands, November voters use the 2022 lines. People who voted in the August primary under House Bill 1's lines may find themselves in a different district, with different nominees, than the one they voted in last month. If voters later approve House Bill 1, the opinion says it takes effect 30 days after the election, which is after this November House vote is already held.2

  • If the September 3 order stands, November voters use the 2022 lines. People who voted in the August primary under House Bill 1's lines may find themselves in a different district, with different nominees, than the one they voted in last month. If voters later approve House Bill 1, the opinion says it takes effect 30 days after the election, which is after this November House vote is already held.2

On August 25 the secretary certified as "duly and lawfully nominated" the candidates for the November 3 general election. Those nominations were certified under the House Bill 1 lines used in the August primary. In the 5th District the certified names are Rick Brattin (Republican), Emanuel Cleaver, II (Democratic), and Randall (Randy) Langkraehr (Libertarian).35

Hoskins's reply to the U.S. Supreme Court says both Democratic and Republican nominees are still wondering whether they are, in fact, running in the general election, and it cites a Kansas City Star piece for that. The Star piece is not among this story's records. The Hill, citing St. Louis Public Radio, later reported the two options discussed: primary winners advance, or the parties choose nominees.751

  • Hoskins's reply to the U.S. Supreme Court says both Democratic and Republican nominees are still wondering whether they are, in fact, running in the general election, and it cites a Kansas City Star piece for that. The Star piece is not among this story's records. The Hill, citing St. Louis Public Radio, later reported the two options discussed: primary winners advance, or the parties choose nominees.751

The three statutes this story cites cover committee makeup when district lines change and replacing a nominee who dies, withdraws, or is disqualified. None of those three sections names what happens to a primary winner when a court changes the lines after the primary.3233

  • The three statutes this story cites cover committee makeup when district lines change and replacing a nominee who dies, withdraws, or is disqualified. None of those three sections names what happens to a primary winner when a court changes the lines after the primary.3233

The attorney general told the U.S. Supreme Court that a "federal-election-administration disaster is unfolding in Missouri," that the order would move hundreds of thousands of voters into new districts, and that the state is unsure it can switch maps in time for a timely federal election. Those are the state's words in its stay application, not findings of the Missouri Supreme Court.5

The reply quotes a Kansas City Star story in which Jackson County officials said they will be ready to comply while acknowledging it will take some work. That quotation is the reply's; the Star story itself is not among this story's records.7

  • The reply quotes a Kansas City Star story in which Jackson County officials said they will be ready to comply while acknowledging it will take some work. That quotation is the reply's; the Star story itself is not among this story's records.7

Missouri law sets a late-ballot deadline of 5:00 p.m. on the eighth Tuesday before the election. The version in force since August 28, 2026 keeps that line, as did the 2018 version. For November 3, 2026, that Tuesday is September 8, the date in the court's order. Justice Kavanaugh, who hears emergency matters from the region, asked critics of the new map to respond by Monday.4127

County clerks have to print ballots that match the map the court said is in force. How long that takes is disputed under oath. The stay application, relying on Jackson County's election official, says moving hundreds of thousands of voters to new districts in the state voter system ordinarily takes two to three weeks, or 7 to 10 days on emergency hours; then ballots must be designed and tested, about 14 days; then local officials need 7 more days to print. That is 28 days at best. Boone County's clerk, Brianna Lennon, swore on August 18 that every voter in the state is already tied to both the 2022 and 2025 districts, that the 2022 districts were never overwritten, and that from a technological standpoint she had no concern about running November on them. Her affidavit is in the appendix the state filed. Federal law requires overseas and military ballots to go out 45 days before the election to voters who requested them at least that early; September 19 is that date for November 3. The people who feel that deadline are local election officials and the voters who use those ballots, including service members overseas.51630

  • County clerks have to print ballots that match the map the court said is in force. How long that takes is disputed under oath. The stay application, relying on Jackson County's election official, says moving hundreds of thousands of voters to new districts in the state voter system ordinarily takes two to three weeks, or 7 to 10 days on emergency hours; then ballots must be designed and tested, about 14 days; then local officials need 7 more days to print. That is 28 days at best. Boone County's clerk, Brianna Lennon, swore on August 18 that every voter in the state is already tied to both the 2022 and 2025 districts, that the 2022 districts were never overwritten, and that from a technological standpoint she had no concern about running November on them. Her affidavit is in the appendix the state filed. Federal law requires overseas and military ballots to go out 45 days before the election to voters who requested them at least that early; September 19 is that date for November 3. The people who feel that deadline are local election officials and the voters who use those ballots, including service members overseas.51630
  • 5Stay application, Hoskins v. Von Glahnordinarily take two-to-three weeksballots must be designed and tested, which
  • 16Stay application appendix, volume 3every voter in Boone County - and statewide - is tied to both their 2022 Congressional district and their 2025 Congressional districtFrom a technological standpoint, I do not have concerns about local election officials holding an election in November 2026 using the 2022 Congressional districts.
  • 3052 U.S.C. 20302not later than 45 days before the election

The coverage

What the coverage got right, and what it got wrong

The held articles were checked against the recovered opinion, the mandate, the stay application, and the U.S. Supreme Court docket. Political color (Trump's post, the governor's disappointment) is the outlets' record of those statements. Trump's and the governor's own posts of those remarks are not among this story's records.2

  • The held articles were checked against the recovered opinion, the mandate, the stay application, and the U.S. Supreme Court docket. Political color (Trump's post, the governor's disappointment) is the outlets' record of those statements. Trump's and the governor's own posts of those remarks are not among this story's records.2

ABC, from an Associated Press dispatch, said the court unanimously blocked the new districts from November and ordered a statewide vote. That checks out against the court's holding that the petition was legal and the 2022 map remains in force. ABC quoted the court that the legislation "did not go into effect and will not go into effect unless and until approved by the voters." That matches the opinion.42

The Associated Press, writing after the Friday appeal, said Missouri asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the new districts in the midterms, that Kavanaugh asked for a Monday response, and that the state court had said the prior districts must be used in the general election. Those check out against the docket and the opinion.43

Fox News reported Hanaway's Friday emergency appeal and quoted her calling the ruling catastrophic. That quote is Fox's record of her statement. Her office's own release uses different words: "unprecedented" and "constitutional crisis." Both are her office. They are not the same sentence.444

Politico called the decision a unanimous 7-0 ruling. The constitution says the court is composed of seven judges. The opinion says all concur. Politico's 7-0 checks out as arithmetic from those two records.45262

The Hill, on the stay application, wrote that the state must revert to a "6-1 GOP-favored design." That is wrong. ABC and the Associated Press say the current House split is six Republicans and two Democrats. A 6-1 split would be seven seats. Missouri has eight.4842

USA Today reported the unanimous ruling, the order to use the 2022 maps in November, and Trump's post calling the decision "horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional." The ruling checks out. The Trump wording is USA Today's record of a social-media post; the post itself is not among this story's records.492

One claim, examined

Claim checked against the record

The claim: a court threw out, blocked, or paused a map after the primary. The record: the court said House Bill 1 never took effect. A sufficient referendum petition filed on December 9, 2025, referred the bill to the voters. The August primary used lines the court later said were never the law. The 2022 map, the court wrote, is the only congressional map in effect for November.242

"Blocked" is not false about the practical result for November: those lines cannot be used unless voters approve them and the bill then takes effect 30 days later. It is the wrong description of the legal holding. The court did not take a live map off the books. It said the map never went on the books.2

  • "Blocked" is not false about the practical result for November: those lines cannot be used unless voters approve them and the bill then takes effect 30 days later. It is the wrong description of the legal holding. The court did not take a live map off the books. It said the map never went on the books.2
how the petition numbers were read

The recovered opinion names the petition 2026-R004. The court's own communications summary names it 2026-R0004, with an extra zero. Both files are saved. Quotes about the petition number follow the opinion when the holding is at issue, and note the summary's extra zero when the summary is the source. The summary itself says it is not part of the opinion and that quotes should go to the opinion.

September 4 through 8

What happened next

On September 4 the Missouri Supreme Court denied Hoskins's motion to stay the injunction while he sought emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court. The chief justice signed that one-sentence order. The September 3 mandate had already reversed the Cole County judgment.3

Hanaway's office said the decision "clearly violates federal law," that it had thrust the state into what the office called a constitutional crisis, and that the office would seek relief from the U.S. Supreme Court. Its release also said that "never before in American history" had a court overturned a congressional map after a primary and before a general election. Missouri's own history has a nearby event: in November 1922 the state's voters rejected, by referendum, Proposition 17, a law dividing the state into sixteen congressional districts, 240,340 yes to 386,522 no, about 61.7 percent against. That was a referendum on a map, not a court order after a primary, so it does not disprove the narrower claim. It does mean a Missouri congressional map has gone to the voters before.415

Hoskins's own September 3 statement, dated for immediate release, said: "We may have lost the battle today, but the war to preserve our constitutional republic is far from over."13

The emergency application, docketed September 4 as 26A304, Hoskins v. Von Glahn, asks the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the Missouri order. Justice Kavanaugh asked for a response by noon Eastern on September 7. The application asks the Court to issue a decision no later than September 14, 2026, so Missouri can meet the September 19 overseas-ballot date.275

Richard von Glahn's opposition argues that the U.S. Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction because the Missouri court's holding is a question of state law, and it quotes the Missouri opinion that House Bill 1 "is not the law and has never been the law."6

The docket shows a brief in support from the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee, and the Missouri Republican State Committee, filed September 4. On September 7, four friend-of-the-court briefs arrived, two on each side. Against the stay: Missouri voters Jake Maggard and Gregg Lombardi, and Campaign Legal Center with the ACLU of Missouri Foundation and the ACLU Foundation. For the stay: the American Center for Law and Justice, and Florida, Texas, and 18 other states. The docket names the filers; the briefs' own covers say the side.2717181920

The docket as of September 8 shows Hoskins's reply in support of the application, filed that day. The reply says that if the U.S. Supreme Court stays the injunction, the state will use the House Bill 1 map for the 2026 general election. That docket does not show a stay order. The reply also says multiple lawsuits have already been filed against the state over the map and names two, both filed September 4 in the federal court in St. Louis: Onder v. Missouri and Berry v. Hoskins. The court's filing list for that day shows the Onder plaintiffs, who include Rick Brattin, the Republican nominee in the reshaped 5th District, moving for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, and the court ordering Paul Berry III to show cause why his request for a three-judge panel should not be denied. What each suit asks for is in complaints that are not among this story's records. The reply says local officials were deciding whether to change maps or "hold out for a federal court order."277217

  • 27U.S. Supreme Court docket 26A304Reply of Denny Hoskins in support of application submitted.
  • 7Hoskins reply in support of the staythe State will use the HB 1 map for the 2026 GeneralMultiple lawsuits have already been filed against the Statehold out for a federal court order
  • 21Federal court filing list, September 4MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and TRO by Plaintiffs Debra Havens, Robert Onder, Brattin Richard, Patricia Thomas.show cause in writing no later than 12:00 p.m. CT on September 7, 2026 as to why his requests to convene a three-judge panel

On September 8, the court's deadline, Hoskins signed a certificate of sufficiency for the petition. It says that, pursuant to the Supreme Court's opinion, the petition contains enough valid signatures and "shall be placed on the ballot at the November 3, 2026 General Election." The secretary's ballot-measures page now lists the referendum as Proposition A, certified for November 3, with the certificate linked. A yes vote approves House Bill 1; a no vote leaves the 2022 districts in place.3940

Watching: whether the U.S. Supreme Court issues a stay, and whether it does so by the September 14 date the state requested so Missouri can meet the September 19 overseas-ballot date; what the federal district court does with the Onder and Berry suits; and how Missouri matches August nominees to the 2022 districts if the order stands.52

  • Watching: whether the U.S. Supreme Court issues a stay, and whether it does so by the September 14 date the state requested so Missouri can meet the September 19 overseas-ballot date; what the federal district court does with the Onder and Berry suits; and how Missouri matches August nominees to the 2022 districts if the order stands.52

Open questions

What we do not know yet

  • Whether the U.S. Supreme Court will stay the Missouri order. The application, the opposition, and Hoskins's September 8 reply are on the Supreme Court docket as of September 8. No stay order is on it.27
  • How nominees chosen under House Bill 1's August primary appear on a 2022-map November ballot. The opinion orders use of the 2022 districts. The three statutes this story cites do not name that match.2
  • Whether Missouri can meet the September 19 overseas-ballot date if it switches maps. That uncertainty is the attorney general's, stated in the stay application. It is not a finding of the Missouri court.43
  • What the two federal suits in St. Louis ask for and when the court will rule. This story cites the court's filing list and Hoskins's description, not the complaints themselves.21
  • How many of the more than 300,000 submitted signatures were valid. The court did not have to count, because Hoskins did not dispute the number.2

Sources

The records

Everything this page rests on, numbered where the story cites it. We keep a dated copy of each one.

Primary documents

  1. 1Missouri Supreme Court summary of SC101805 · released September 3, 2026 · the court’s own plain-language account of a unanimous decision; the summary says it is not part of the opinion
  2. 2Opinion in von Glahn v. Hoskins (recovered copy) · issued September 3, 2026 · the holding, the 4 p.m. rejection, the September 8 order, and “All concur.” Recovered copy; the court-origin file is the Supreme Court of Missouri opinion path for SC101805, which does not let its pages be saved from this machine.
  3. 3Mandate and stay denial · September 3 and 4, 2026 · the reversal of Cole County and the denial of a stay, signed by the chief justice
  4. 4Attorney General Hanaway statement · September 3, 2026 · the state’s written reaction the day of the ruling
  5. 5Stay application, Hoskins v. Von Glahn · filed September 4, 2026 · the overseas-ballot date, the requested September 14 decision, the Elections Clause argument, and the 14- and 7-day ballot work
  6. 6Von Glahn opposition to the stay · filed September 7, 2026 · the challenger’s jurisdiction argument and quotation of the Missouri holding
  7. 7Hoskins reply in support of the stay · filed September 8, 2026 · the state’s statement that a stay means House Bill 1 will be used in November
  8. 8House Bill 1, enrolled text · truly agreed September 12, 2025 · what the bill does, including the 120th Congress effective date
  9. 9Governor Kehoe signing release · September 28, 2025 · the date the governor signed House Bill 1
  10. 10Maggard v. State, SC101581 · issued May 12, 2026 · Justia copy · the court’s holding that a sufficient December 9 petition meant House Bill 1 did not take effect December 11
  11. 11Harris v. Hoskins, SC101806 · issued September 3, 2026 · Justia copy · companion ballot ruling the same day, ordered onto the ballot before September 8
  12. 12People Not Politicians v. Hoskins, SC101801 · issued September 3, 2026 · Justia copy · companion ruling the same day, dismissed as moot
  13. 13Secretary Hoskins statement · September 3, 2026 · Hoskins’s written reaction the day of the ruling
  14. 14Stay application appendix, volume 1 · filed September 4, 2026 · the August 19 Cole County judgment date in the table of contents
  15. 15Stay application appendix, volume 2 · filed September 4, 2026 · the certificate of insufficiency at 597a, which has no readable text layer
  16. 16Stay application appendix, volume 3 · filed September 4 · Boone County's sworn account that the 2022 districts are already selectable
  17. 17Maggard and Lombardi amicus brief · September 7, opposing the stay · which side this brief took
  18. 18Campaign Legal Center and ACLU amicus brief · September 7, opposing the stay · which side this brief took
  19. 19American Center for Law and Justice amicus brief · September 7, supporting the stay · which side this brief took
  20. 20Florida, Texas, and 18 states amicus brief · September 7, supporting the stay · which side this brief took and who signed it
  21. 21Federal court filing list, September 4 · Eastern District of Missouri · the two federal suits and what the court did with them that day
  22. 22Luther v. State, March 24 · Supreme Court of Missouri via Justia · the first ruling in the sequence, on mid-decade redistricting
  23. 23Ballot-summary appeal, April 30 · Court of Appeals via Justia · the ballot-title ruling in the sequence
  24. 24Healey v. State, May 12 · Supreme Court of Missouri via Justia · the ruling on the map's geometry and the description of the districts
  25. 25NAACP v. Kehoe, May 27 · Supreme Court of Missouri via Justia · the special-session ruling in the sequence

Official data

  1. 26Missouri Constitution · Secretary of State publication · the referendum clause, when a referred measure takes effect, and that the court is composed of seven judges
  2. 27U.S. Supreme Court docket 26A304 · docketed September 4, 2026 · Kavanaugh’s September 7 response deadline, the September 4 brief in support, the September 7 amicus filings, and the September 8 reply
  3. 28Missouri House Journal, September 12, 2025 · House of Representatives · the House third-reading roll call, 90 to 65
  4. 29Missouri Senate Journal, September 12, 2025 · Senate · the Senate third-reading roll call, 21 to 11
  5. 3052 U.S.C. 20302 · United States Code · overseas and military ballots 45 days before the election
  6. 31Missouri Revised Statutes 115.125 · Revisor of Statutes · late ballot changes by 5:00 p.m. on the eighth Tuesday before the election
  7. 32Missouri Revised Statutes 115.367 · Revisor of Statutes · nominating-committee makeup when district lines change
  8. 33Missouri Revised Statutes 115.363 · Revisor of Statutes · replacing a nominee who dies, withdraws, or is disqualified
  9. 34U.S. House party breakdown · updated September 2, 2026 · 218 Republicans, 214 Democrats, 1 Independent, 2 vacancies
  10. 352026 general election certified candidates · certified August 25, 2026 · the 5th District nominees certified as duly and lawfully nominated
  11. 36Missouri Secretary of State petitions page · saved September 8, 2026 · the petitions page we saved, which does not list petition 2026-R004
  12. 37NCSL mid-decade redistricting tracker · updated September 1, 2026 · ten states have changed congressional maps since summer 2025
  13. 38Abbott v. LULAC stay order · U.S. Supreme Court · the Texas stay the state cites for late-map disruption
  14. 39Certificate of sufficiency, September 8 · Missouri Secretary of State · that the referendum was certified on the court's deadline
  15. 40Ballot measures page, saved September 8 · Missouri Secretary of State · the Proposition A label and certification
  16. 41RSMo 115.125, effective August 28, 2026 · Missouri Revisor · the late-ballot deadline in the law in force at the ruling

Coverage checked

  1. 42ABC News / Associated Press, September 3 · published September 3 · the current six-and-two House split and the Kansas City district
  2. 43Associated Press, September 5 · published September 5 · the Friday appeal and the state’s claim it is unsure it can switch maps
  3. 44Fox News, September 5 · published September 5 · Hanaway’s quoted “catastrophic” line on the appeal
  4. 45Politico, September 3 · published September 3 · the 7-0 count, checked against the court’s “All concur”
  5. 46The Hill, September 3 · published September 3 · the Hill’s quotation of the holding on House Bill 1
  6. 47The Hill on Trump’s reaction · published September 4 · the Hill’s record of Trump’s condemnation
  7. 48The Hill on the stay application · published September 5 · the wrong “6-1” label for the prior map
  8. 49USA Today, September 3 · published September 3 · the ruling and Trump’s post as USA Today recorded it
  9. 50USA Today, September 5 · published September 5 · the stay application and the September 8 deadline
  10. 51The Hill, later rundown · published September 4 · St. Louis Public Radio on primary winners advancing or parties choosing nominees

How we check.

Sources

    Source reader

    Source