Full Breakdown
Missouri Supreme Court Weighs Fate of Contested 2025 Congressional Map
5/13/2026, 2:53:24 AM
The Challenge Before the Court
On Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court heard oral arguments in three separate cases challenging the 2025 congressional redistricting plan. The lawsuits contest the map’s constitutionality, its compliance with the state’s compactness requirement, and whether the map should be suspended pending a voter-initiated referendum.
Background: Trump’s Redistricting Push and Missouri’s 2025 Plan
The 2025 map is part of President Donald Trump’s broader effort to encourage Republican-led states to redraw districts before the 2026 midterms. In Missouri, the plan seeks to dismantle the Kansas City-based 5th District—a Democratic stronghold—by splitting the city and adding voters from 14 counties along the Missouri River.
Key Players
- Plaintiffs: Missouri voters represented by attorneys Jonathan Hawley (Perkins Coie) and Abha Khanna (Elias Law Group).
- State officials: Solicitor General Louis J. Capozzi III, Principal Deputy Solicitor General Kathleen Hunker, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, and Attorney General Catherine Hanaway.
- Advocacy groups: People Not Politicians (PAC), National Redistricting Foundation (Marina Jenkins), and Put Missouri First (PAC).
Timeline of Litigation
- Mar 12, 2024: Lower court upheld the map’s compactness.
- Mar 27, 2024: Circuit Judge Brian Stumpe dismissed the claim that the referendum automatically suspends the map.
- Mar 24, 2024: Court affirmed Governor Mike Kehoe’s authority to convene a special session for redistricting.
- Tuesday (date unspecified): Supreme Court oral arguments.
- May 26, 2024: Deadline for a final decision before the primary-notice filing deadline.
Data & Statistics
- More than 300,000 signatures verified for the referendum.
- People Not Politicians raised $6.5 million for the petition drive; Put Missouri First raised $3.1 million to oppose the referendum.
- The proposed map divides Kansas City into three districts and stretches the 5th District across 15 counties, creating a “sprawling behemoth” that reaches from the Kansas-Missouri border to Columbia and Osage County.
Why It Matters
If upheld, the map could flip Rep. Emanuel Cleaver’s seat, altering Missouri’s congressional delegation ahead of the 2026 elections. The case also tests the durability of Missouri’s constitutional referendum right, a mechanism that historically suspends legislation pending voter approval.
Official Statements & Responses
State Solicitor General Capozzi argued that legislation cannot be paused while signatures are verified because petitions may later prove fraudulent. Hunker described the plaintiffs’ compactness claim as “micromanagement” of legislative authority and urged the court to preserve the 2025 map until after the upcoming election. Hoskins, citing an opinion from Attorney General Hanaway, maintained that the law remains effective until the Secretary of State certifies the petition’s sufficiency.
Criticism & Opposition
Plaintiffs contend that waiting for certification would “dilute the referendum right, if not destroy it altogether.” Hawley likened premature enactment to a bill taking effect before a governor’s veto, calling it “plainly unconstitutional.” Khanna emphasized that the 2022 map remains the status quo, warning that imposing the 2025 plan would be “unprecedented and unlawful.” Jenkins argued the plan violates the compactness requirement by “tearing apart cohesive areas that share transit, housing, economic and civic interests.”
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The court faces divergent interpretations of whether a referendum automatically suspends a law. Judge Stumpe’s March ruling held the map in effect pending certification, while plaintiffs argue state precedent mandates suspension. Additionally, the compactness analysis varies between a purely mathematical assessment and a geographic-community-based evaluation.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Allowing the August primary to be conducted using districts that are likely to be stayed upon the referendum’s certification — which could occur a matter of weeks before the August primary — will result in chaos, confusion, and unnecessary expense,” — Brianna Lennon, election administrator, Boone County
- “It would be no different than a law that allowed a bill to take effect before the governor had the opportunity to exercise the veto right. That would be plainly unconstitutional, as well, and for the same fundamental reason,” — Jonathan Hawley, attorney, Perkins Coie
- “The referendum right is the people’s veto.” — Jonathan Hawley
- “Hawley’s response was clear: “It would dilute the referendum right, if not destroy it altogether.” — Jonathan Hawley
- “The status quo right now — from all available evidence, in trial until today — is that the 2022 undoubtedly constitutional map remains in place,” — Abha Khanna, attorney, Elias Law Group
- “The 2025 plan flies in the face of that requirement by tearing apart cohesive areas that share transit, housing, economic and civic interests and more,” — Marina Jenkins, executive director, National Redistricting Foundation
What’s Next
The court is expected to issue a ruling by the May 26 deadline. A decision affirming the map would allow its use in the August 4 primary; a ruling that suspends the map could restore the 2022 districts and trigger a new redistricting cycle before the 2026 elections.
