Missouri Voters Got the Signatures. A Judge Says They Still Can’t Vote on Trump-Backed Map

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — A Missouri judge ruled Wednesday that voters cannot use the state’s veto referendum process to challenge a new congressional map drawn by Republican lawmakers at the urging of President Donald Trump.

The ruling upholds the decision by Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to reject an initiative from People Not Politicians, not because it didn’t have the signatures—but because he said the state constitution does not allow it.

People Not Politicians submitted more than 300,000 signatures in December to overturn the redistricting effort approved by the state legislature last September. Missouri was the third state to engage in mid-cycle redistricting following Texas and California.

The new map, already used in the August primary, was designed to defeat Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver in Missouri's 5th Congressional District and give Republicans one additional seat in the state’s congressional delegation.

Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green, elected as a Republican, wrote that the Missouri Constitution does not clearly transfer congressional redistricting authority from the General Assembly to voters through referendum.

In response, People Not Politicians said it will appeal.

“The most important thing that happened today is that there was a quick ruling from Cole County Circuit Court,” the group said in a statement on Wednesday.

“Today, Judge Green signed the proposed judgement from the Republican National Committee that upheld Hoskins; certificate of insufficiency for the referendum. In doing so, Judge Green sided with the out-of-state interest (the RNC) who intervened in our case.”

The Missouri Constitution Extends Broad Rights to Voters

The text of the state constitution makes the dispute more complicated than presented in Green’s ruling, which was basically that since it does not explicitly give voters the right to challenge redistricting efforts, it is not a right they have.

Article III, Section 49 says Missourians “reserve power to approve or reject by referendum any act of the general assembly, except as hereinafter provided.”

The exceptions spelled out cover laws necessary for the immediate preservation of public peace, health or safety, along with certain state appropriations. Congressional redistricting is not specifically listed.

The Missouri constitution also states:

“When the number of representatives to which the state is entitled in the House of the Congress of the United States under the census of 1950 and each census thereafter is certified to the governor, the general assembly shall by law divide the state into districts corresponding with the number of representatives to which it is entitled, which districts shall be composed of contiguous territory as compact and as nearly equal in population as may be.”

One, this contains no prohibition on referendums.

But two, the constitution only explicitly discusses redistricting done after the census—which was the standard practice for every state in the US until the current mid-cycle redistricting fight erupted last year.

There is also federal precedent that may support People Not Politicians.

In Ohio ex rel. Davis v. Hildebrant (1916), the Supreme Court upheld the use of a citizen referendum to reject a congressional redistricting law. The court cited this decision as precedent more recently in its 2023 Moore v. Harper decision

The justices brought up the case while explaining that congressional redistricting remains subject to a state's normal lawmaking process.

Further, Missouri has done it before. Voters used a referendum in 1922 to reject a congressional map approved by the Legislature. That referendum was never challenged on the grounds that voters lacked the constitutional authority to decide the issue.

The ruling on People Not Politicians’ referendum was not the only one on a citizen initiative Green—who is up for re-election this year—made Wednesday.

He also upheld Hoskins' decision to block Amendment 6, proposed by Respect Missouri Voters, which would make it harder for lawmakers to overturn or weaken laws and constitutional amendments approved through citizen initiatives.

In his ruling, he agreed with Hoskins that the proposal violated Missouri's single-subject requirement because it made changes affecting multiple constitutional provisions.

The secretary of state had acknowledged that Amendment 6 gathered enough signatures to qualify for the ballot, and state records also showed the redistricting referendum cleared its signature requirement.

Both cases are expected to move quickly to the Missouri Supreme Court.