Case: von Glahn v. Hoskins

This is a Missouri state court challenge to the Secretary of State’s decision to block a public referendum on a bill which redrew congressional districts to favor republican voters for the 2026 election. 

On August 4, 2026, an individual Missouri Citizen filed this lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri against Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, which alleged that Hoskins’ decision to block a referendum on House Bill 1, which was enacted to redraw congressional districts to favor republican voters, was illegal. The plaintiff contended that the state government unconstitutionally obstructed a public vote on new congressional redistricting plans despite the submission of over 300,000 valid signatures. Although federal courts previously dismissed a state-led attempt to stop the petition, the Secretary of State ultimately issued a certificate of insufficiency based on a claim that the referendum violated the constitution. The petition argued that the Missouri Constitution grants citizens the explicit right to approve or reject legislative acts through referendums and that redistricting is a legislative function subject to standard state lawmaking procedures, including public oversight. The plaintiff requested injunctive relief to overturn the Secretary's rejection and to ensure the 2026 general election utilizes the correct districts.

This case was assigned to Missouri Circuit Court Judge Daniel Green. 

On August 7, 2026, the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee, and the Missouri Republican State Committee moved to intervene as defendants. 

The defendant filed an answer to the complaint on August 7, 2026, and the proposed Intervenors filed their answer on August 9, 2026. 

On August 12, 2026, the Court held a hearing on the motion to intervene, and ultimately granted the motion. The same day, it scheduled a hearing on the merits of the case, for August 18, 2026, which was ultimately continued to August 19, 2026. 

After receiving briefing from both parties, the Court held a hearing on the merits of the case on August 19, 2026. The same day, the Court issued judgment for the defendants. It reasoned that Missouri’s referendum process does not apply to congressional maps, as the state constitution grants the General Assembly specific authority over redistricting. Additionally, the judge determined that interrupting the election process after the primary had already occurred would violate federal law and disenfranchise over a million voters. Ultimately, the court rejected the plaintiff's claims, maintaining that the current district boundaries, as redrawn by HB 1, must remain in place for the 2026 general election.

The plaintiff appealed the judgment to the Missouri Supreme Court on August 19, 2026. 

On August 25, 2026, the plaintiff filed his appellate brief, which argued that the trial court erred in refusing to reverse the secretary’s determination that the referendum petition was insufficient because under the Missouri Constitution, any act of the general assembly is subject to referendum except emergency legislation and appropriation bills, of which HB 1 is neither. 

Two interested groups also filed amicus briefs in this matter. On August 24, 2026, the Election Authorities of Polk and Boone County filed an amicus brief arguing, consistent with the plaintiffs’ theory, that the circuit court erred in concluding that local election authorities are unable to utilize the 2022 congressional districts for the November, 2026 election. Then, the following day, on August 24, 2026, the Campaign Legal Center, ACLU, and ACLU of Missouri filed another amicus brief, further arguing that the Elections Clause offers no basis for the Secretary to preclude a referendum on HB 1. 

On September 3, 2026, the Missouri Supreme Court issued an opinion overturning the lower court’s judgment, holding that citizens have a constitutional right to challenge congressional redistricting through a public referendum. Because the referendum petition was found to be legally valid and submitted on time, the Court determined that the proposed new map in House Bill 1 never actually took effect. Consequently, the state was ordered to use its previous 2022 congressional districts for the upcoming election until voters could decide the matter at the polls. The ruling emphasizes that the power of referendum is a fundamental part of the state's lawmaking process and applies to nearly any legislative act.

On September 4, 2026, Defendant Hoskins appealed to the United States Supreme Court, asking the justices to advise on this matter, and requesting an emergency stay of the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling.  He said that the state was “genuinely unsure whether it can switch its governing congressional map in time to run a timely federal election,” and he argued that the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling violates several provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court denied the application on September 8, 2026, without issuing an opinion. 

The day following the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling, Missouri political candidates and voters challenged the ruling in Federal Court. The related federal case has produced conflicting opinions, and thus the issue of Missouri’s redistricting is not fully settled. You can review the related case HERE.