Missouri AG defends gerrymandered map

JEFFERSON CITY (Missouri Independent) — The two cases that will determine whether Missourians vote in new congressional districts gerrymandered to favor Republicans or in the districts in place since 2022 are in the hands of the state Supreme Court.

The seven judges remained mostly silent throughout arguments in front of a packed courtroom in Jefferson City. Lawyers for the state and the Missouri Republican Party told them any decision they made would be too late to change plans to use the map passed in 2025, and that in one of the two cases, the people bringing the lawsuit had no right to be in court.

While the judges heard arguments, opponents of the gerrymandered map gathered outside to rally in support of a referendum. About 300 people showed up to chant, carry signs, and maintain their enthusiasm for a summer and fall of campaigning.

From opponents of the map, the judges were urged to ignore the fact that candidate lineups were set when filing ended in March. And, in a case trying to throw out the whole map, that combining voters in Kansas City with people in counties more than 100 miles away created an unconstitutionally elongated district.

The latest fight over the constitutionality of the map

The high court has already decided two threshold issues on redistricting in rulings issued March 24. The court said Gov. Mike Kehoe had the authority to call lawmakers into special session to write the bill, and lawmakers were within their constitutional power to enact it.

The day in court was structured so judges first heard arguments over whether the map meets the state Constitution’s requirements for districts to be compact and contiguous. If the judges rule it does not, and toss out the legislation passed in a special session last year, the decision would also dispose of the second case, which is over when the Constitution’s directive that no law subject to a referendum takes effect until it is approved in a statewide vote.

“Compactness isn’t optional,” said Asseem Mulji, attorney for the ACLU of Missouri, as he opened the case challenging the constitutionality of the map.

For more than 100 years, he said, the core of Kansas City has all been in one congressional district. Under the map passed by lawmakers, the main urban area is split among three districts. 

Map fails compactness test

And Abha Khanna, the attorney representing clients sponsored by the National Redistricting Foundation, said just a look at the map drawn last year by lawmakers shows that it fails when tested for compactness.

“It doesn’t take a doctor in political science to know that downtown Kansas City doesn’t have any connection to Randolph and Osage counties,” she said.

In response, Kathleen Hunker of the attorney general’s office said the map passed last year meets every constitutional test. The 5th District isn’t the least compact district ever used in Missouri, she said.

“There is no such thing as a perfect map or a perfect district,” she said.

And if the judges agree that the map is unconstitutional, Hunker said, lawmakers should correct any flaws.

“If this court rules in favor of the appellants, keep the 2025 plan in place until after the elections and the Legislature has a chance,” she said.

The Trump Administration’s desperation to maintain a slim Republican majority

The fight over the map began last summer when President Donald Trump pressured Missouri Republicans for help to maintain the slim Republican majority in the U.S. House.

Republicans hold six of Missouri’s eight seats in Congress, and the partisan goal of the new map is to oust 5th District U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Kansas City Democrat, by splitting Kansas City and adding voters in 14 counties along the Missouri River. 

Cleaver’s current district includes most of Kansas City and a portion of Jackson and Clay counties outside the city. Cleaver filed for re-election in February and said he will stay in the race regardless of which district is used in this year’s elections.

Five Republicans have filed for the nomination to oppose Cleaver in hopes of exploiting the partisan advantage in the map passed last year.

Questions remain on which map will be in use for the 2026 primary and general elections

The question of which map will be used in the Aug. 4 primary and the Nov. 3 general elections was the subject of the second case heard Tuesday. When the political action committee People Not Politicians submitted more than 300,000 signatures on Dec. 9, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins defied more than 100 years of precedent by declaring that the bill creating the gerrymandered map would go into effect despite the petition filing.

In the Cole County decision upholding Hoskins’ action, Circuit Judge Brian Stumpe ruled that the plaintiffs, who argued their rights were being violated because they signed the petition, did not have standing, or a right to sue.

Stumpe also ruled that the lawsuit was premature because Hoskins had made no decision on whether the petition had sufficient signatures to meet the minimum requirements for placing the map on a statewide ballot.

“Plaintiffs are asking this court to relieve the Secretary of State of his constitutionally mandated duties,” Stumpe wrote.

That decision should stand, said Marc Ellinger, an attorney representing the Missouri Republican Party.

Hoskins must decide by the Missouri primary

Hoskins has until Aug. 4 to issue a decision on whether the petition has enough signatures, and he told reporters after the hearing that he intends to use every day allowed.

Because Hoskins has made no decision, there is no controversy, Ellinger said.

“When there is a future unknown event, the case is not ripe,” he said.

In his arguments that Stumpe’s decision should be overturned, attorney Jonathan Hawley said his clients had the right to sue because the right of referendum is an individual right. By rejecting the actions of past secretaries of state, who all put measures passed by lawmakers on hold while petitions were checked, that right is being violated, he said.

“If the referendum right is still worth protecting, the state’s position must be rejected,” he said.

In the only questions from the bench in either case, Judge Zel Fischer asked who would be harmed if the map from 2025 is used in the Aug. 4 primary.

Everyone would be injured, Hawley replied.

“It would dilute the referendum process if not destroy it altogether,” Hawley said.

Redistricting push is a result of invalidating a portion of the Voting Rights Act

The Missouri gerrymandering process is playing out against a national battle for control of Congress. On April 29, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 mandating that states draw districts where minority voters hold the majority of votes is unconstitutional.

Since then, Alabama, Tennessee, and Louisiana have moved to eliminate districts that were drawn to align with the law. In Louisiana, the governor has suspended the state’s primary elections for the U.S. House, while in Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the state could use a 2021 map that had been thrown out for violating the Voting Rights Act.

Missouri’s 1st District is the only one in the state that was drawn to meet the requirements of the 1965 law. Speaking to reporters after the court hearing, Hoskins said lawmakers should revise Missouri’s map to eliminate the Black-majority district.

“The definition of racism,” Hoskins said, “is drawing districts based on the color of one’s skin. We don’t want that in this state.”

Rudi Keller, Missouri Independent

+ postsBio

Rudi Keller is the Deputy Editor of Missouri Independent and covers the state budget and the legislature. A graduate of the University of Missouri School of Journalism, he spent 22 of his 32 years in journalism covering Missouri government and politics for the Columbia Daily Tribune, where he won awards for spot news and investigative reporting.

Missouri Independent is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

This author does not have any more posts.