Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 09/08/2026 3:06:55 PM PDT by CFW
The Supreme Court today rejected a last-ditch effort by Missouri Republicans to use a newly drawn congressional map, which was designed to maximize their political power, for this year’s midterm elections.
In a brief order issued by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court left in place a Missouri Supreme Court ruling from last week that said the map could not be used while a ballot initiative moves forward that could lead to the redrawn map being tossed out by voters. Kavanaugh handles emergency requests that arise from Missouri.
The 2025 Republican redistricting plan, part of a wave prompted by Trump, was designed to eliminate one of the state’s two Democratic-held seats, currently held by Rep. Emanuel Cleaver.
But the Supreme Court’s decision means that the 2022 map, with six Republican-held seats and two Democratic-held seats, will remain in place.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
“I can’t believe this! Now Missouri votes will be voting from a different district map in the general election than the one they voted on in their primary election.”
____________________________________________________________
Missouri law requires a redistricting map to be approved by the voters via referendum BEFORE it becomes law and can actually be used. In their rush, the Missouri legislature never bothered to get the new map approved by the voters, so the last approved map is still the controlling law.
Then what happens to the person you voted in the primaries for?
Chief Judge Stephen Clark rejected the challengers’ Elections Clause argument, ruling Missouri may subject congressional redistricting to a referendum. But he found they are highly likely to prevail under Article I §2 and the Equal Protection Clause.
Clark says changing maps after Missouri already held its primary would effectively nullify some voters’ primary votes by moving them into districts where they had no opportunity to help select the nominees appearing in November.
The judge also invoked Purcell “in reverse,” reasoning that using the 2025 map preserves the election rules voters, candidates and officials already relied on. The TRO lasts 14 days while the court considers a preliminary injunction.
A federal judge just restored the maps used in the primary.
See my post above.
S—t F—k!
“A federal judge just restored the maps used in the primary.
See my post above.”
____________________________________________________________
Since there’s already an order by the Supreme Court, which do you think will carry the day? Probably not some District Judge.
President Trump needs to write a sternly worded Truth Social post and tag the members of the Court.
Smarter Republicans predicted this would happen, but too many were too eager to stop Trump from saying bad things about them.
The map is still in effect
I think the federal judge will win out on this one.
The deadline to finalize the ballot was 5 PM today.
Any appeal of it would be tough as there would be a very good Purcell* argument to keep the 7-1 maps in place with the ballot deadline passing.
* The Purcell principle is the doctrine that courts should not change election rules too close to an election, because of the risk of causing confusion. It is named after Purcell v. Gonzalez, a 2006 case from the U.S. Supreme Court’s emergency docket.
It is frequently invoked by the Supreme Court and lower courts to allow elections to proceed under a state’s preferred voting requirements, maps, and other rules.
Parameters for what constitutes an applicable change in election rules or when is too close to an election have never been laid out, an ambiguity that allows the Supreme Court to invoke it selectively.
Not an order…Kavanaugh just rejected taking the case.
“Since there’s already an order by the Supreme Court, which do you think will carry the day? Probably not some District Judge.”
That depends upon whether the SCOTUS order is procedural or substantive (I have not been able to find Kavanaugh’s order). If procedural, then the District Court’s order may stand — at least for now.
Here is a substack piece that explains things.
“Missouri’s congressional map litigation reached an extraordinary point Tuesday evening.
First, Justice Brett Kavanaugh outright denied Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins’s emergency application asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stay, or pause, a Missouri Supreme Court ruling that barred the state from using its new congressional map in November.
Then, just minutes later, Chief U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark of the Eastern District of Missouri issued a temporary restraining order requiring Hoskins to use that very same new map for the November election.
Those developments may sound irreconcilable. They are not.”
Legislative districts are decided by the residents of that state. The Fed Govt should have no say. I’m
Kavanaugh???
Might as well been Coney-Bryant or Robert’s.
You think after was done to him, he’d want to stick it to libs every chance he got, Constitutionally that is!
Three republican President appointed disappointments who screw conservatives over constantly!
Ah, hold that thought. Another judge just intervened and restored the 7:1 map. This is a legal morass. Kegger is just one justice ruling on whether to hear the case as I understand it. So now the “settled law” is back on the side of MO.
But who knows?
Did they threaten his children as.they did.in 2020?
No, Missouri law has never ever referred district maps to public referendum!
It’s still seven Republican to two Democrat. That’s pretty good for our state Lake, Missouri.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.