By Andrew Chung
Sept 10 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court blocked Missouri on Thursday from using a redrawn congressional map that favors Republicans in November’s midterm elections, dealing a setback to President Donald Trump and the party’s odds of maintaining its slim majority in the House of Representatives.
The justices granted an emergency request by the map’s challengers to suspend a federal judge’s decision that allowed only the reconfigured boundaries to be used in the November 3 elections.
It was the second time in three days that the nation’s highest judicial body rejected bids to preserve the Republican-drawn map in what became an all-out legal fight, waged in both state and federal courts, over Missouri’s U.S. House of Representatives districts.
Missouri Republicans adopted the new map, which dismantled the Kansas City-based seat of longtime Democratic Representative Emanuel Cleaver, in 2025 as part of a broader effort backed by Trump to redraw congressional districts in ways that could benefit Republican candidates.
Following the Supreme Court’s action on Thursday, Republican officials said midterm elections would be held under the state’s previous congressional map passed in 2022, an outcome they had previously warned would jeopardize their ability to conduct a timely and lawful vote in November.
The Supreme Court’s brief order was unsigned and gave no explanation, as is common when the justices handle emergency matters. No justice publicly dissented from the decision.
The challengers, including a group opposed to the Republican-drawn map called People Not Politicians, had swiftly sought the Supreme Court’s intervention after St. Louis, Missouri-based Chief U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark issued his decision on Tuesday.
Clark’s decision came shortly after the Supreme Court, in a decision made by conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh alone, had declined to intervene in a separate bid by Missouri officials to reinstate the redrawn map, which the state’s top court had blocked until it is put to a referendum.
The judge’s order appeared to conflict with the Missouri Supreme Court’s unanimous September 3 ruling blocking the map, leaving the state’s congressional districts in limbo and injecting further confusion into the high-stakes electoral fight.
Republicans hold a narrow 219-214 majority in the U.S. House, including one independent who caucuses with Republicans.
Richard von Glahn, the executive director of People Not Politicians, praised Thursday’s decision.
“The law is the law, the Missouri constitution is clear as was the Missouri Supreme Court. Over 305,000 Missouri voters — Republicans, Democrats and Independents — took action to block this political power grab last fall,” von Glahn said in a statement.
“Missouri Republicans have played their last card, and they lost,” said Abha Khanna, a lawyer for the group, adding that “Missouri will not be allowed to ram through an egregious gerrymander before the voters have a say.”
“We respect and will continue to comply with all court decisions,” Missouri Republican Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said.
The dispute arose when the group collected enough signatures to file for a referendum under a provision in the state constitution that authorizes a ballot measure to approve any legislative act.
Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, the state’s top election official, rejected the petition, finding that state constitutional language does not apply to congressional redistricting.
The seven-member Missouri Supreme Court, which includes five Republican-appointed judges, disagreed, ruling that the referendum petition was “legal, sufficient, and timely,” and that the redrawn map will not take effect until approved by voters.
Missouri Republican U.S. Representative Bob Onder and other plaintiffs then filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to reinstate the Republican-drawn map, leading to Clark’s now-suspended order.
The fight intensified after Hoskins responded to Clark’s order by telling local election officials to proceed with using the 2025 map. The Missouri Supreme Court then said it would consider holding Hoskins in contempt for those actions.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama, Bill Berkrot and Daniel Wallis)
Comments