Following what the Supreme Court is actually doing can be daunting. Reporting on the subject is often only done within the context of political narratives of the day -- and following the Court's decisions and reading every new case can be a non-starter. The purpose of this Podcast is to make it as easy as possible for members of the public to source information about what is happening at the Supreme Court. For that reason, we read every Opinion Syllabus without any commentary whatsoever. Further, there are no advertisements or sponsors. We call it "information sourcing," and we hope that the podcast is a useful resource for members of the public who want to understand the legal issues of the day, prospective law students who want to get to know legal language and understand good legal writing, and attorneys who can use the podcast to be better advocates for their clients.
*Note this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only.
In People Not Politicians v. Onder, the Supreme Court stayed federal-court orders that would have forced Missouri to use its 2025 congressional map instead of the 2022 map. Under state law, the 2025 map cannot take effect unless voters approve it in a referendum. Relying on Purcell v. Gonzalez, the Court held that federal courts should not change a state's election rules on the eve of an election, especially here, where ballots on the 2022 map had already been printed and mailed and voting had begun. It also rejected the Eighth Circuit's view that the Missouri Supreme Court caused the late change, noting that the state court had flagged the referendum requirement months before the primary.
Hello, this is Jeff Barnum reading the Supreme Court opinion in People, not Politicians et al. v. Robert Onder et al. on application for stay, decided September 25th, 2026. Procurium. In 2022, the Missouri Legislature enacted a redistricting map for elections to the United States House of Representatives. In 2025, the Missouri Legislature enacted a new map, but under the Missouri Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Missouri, a new law such as the 2025 map does not take effect unless and until approved by voters in a referendum in the next election. At least where, as here, the number of voter signatures on the petition suffices to trigger a referendum. Therefore, on September 3, 2026, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the 2025 redistricting map is not the law and has never been the law in Missouri, and will not take effect unless and until approved by Missouri voters by referendum in the 2026 election. In short, as a matter of state law, the 2022 map, not the 2025 map, must be used in the 2026 congressional election. In the wake of that recent Missouri Supreme Court decision, a group of voters and candidates, collectively plaintiffs, sued in federal court. They contended that the U.S. Constitution requires Missouri to use the 2025 map in the 2026 election, even though the 2025 map cannot take effect under Missouri law unless and until it is approved by Missouri voters in the 2026 election. In two orders in the last few weeks, this court has denied such relief. In the first, the Missouri Secretary of State asked this court to stay the September 3rd decision of the Missouri Supreme Court that had prohibited use of the 2025 map in the general election. On September 8th, Justice Kavanaugh, in his capacity as circuit justice for the Eighth Circuit, denied that request, thereby leaving the 2022 map in effect for the 2026 general election. But that same evening, a federal district court in Missouri issued a temporary restraining order, in practical effect an injunction, in effect requiring Missouri to use the 2025 map instead of the 2022 map, essentially ordering belief that the circuit justice had just denied. The district court's September 8th injunction was promptly stayed by this court on September 10th, in an order issued by the full court without any noted dissent. That stay remains in effect. This court's September 10th stay order meant that the 2022 map would be used in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri, absent further order of this court. And the election has now begun under the 2022 map. But on September 21st, 11 days after this court's most recent order, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ordered the District Court to enter a permanent injunction in effect requiring use of the 2025 map instead of the 2022 map in the 2026 election. Given this court's two prior orders in this litigation, our conclusion that this was error should come as no surprise. Consistent with this court's September 10th stay order, we therefore now must stay the district court's new September 21st and September 22nd injunctions, and the 8th Circuit September 21st mandate and the September 22nd order. Even putting this court's prior orders aside, the traditional stay factors also dictate that this court stay those district court and court of appeals orders, just as this court stayed the district court's previous September 8th injunction. On the merits, the court's precedents have not previously stated that Article 1, Section 2 requires a state to use the primary election map in a general election, and given that the equities heavily favor staying this late-breaking intervention, it suffices that the merits are not entirely clear-cut. The equities dictate that we stay the district court September 21st and September 22nd injunctions, as well as the Court of Appeals September 21st and September 22nd orders. See Purcell v. Gonzalez 549 U.S. 1 Supreme Court case from 2006. This court has repeatedly cautioned that lower federal courts should not alter the election rules of a state on the eve of an election. The Purcell principle applies with even greater force here. The election is not merely upcoming, it has already started. Ballots using the 2022 map have been printed and mailed. Absentee voting has already begun, as has military and overseas voting. According to local election officials in Missouri, at this point it is practically impossible to revert to the 2025 map. At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos. Purcell protects against such disorder. The Eighth Circuit panel dealt with Purcell by casting blame on the Missouri Supreme Court for its September 3rd decision prohibiting use of the 2025 map. The state court, it reasoned, destabilized the election with its last-minute decision that could potentially decide the outcome of party control of Congress. The Eighth Circuit application of Purcell was incorrect. Even though federal courts should not impose changes close to an election, states are free to decide for themselves whether last-minute changes to an election are in their best interests, subject, of course, to certain limited constraints imposed by federal law. Moreover, in this case, the Missouri Supreme Court was not responsible for the late breaking changes. On the contrary, in an opinion back in May 2026, well before the primary election, the Missouri Supreme Court stated that the 2025 map would not take effect until approved by voters in an intervening referendum, at least if the referendum petition was legally sufficient. So in the several month period before the August primary election, the Missouri Secretary of State was well aware that conducting the August primary election with the 2025 map carried significant risks. The Secretary, nonetheless, chose to proceed with a 2025 map for the primary. For those reasons, the application for stay presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the court is granted. The September 21, 2026 mandate and September 22, 2026 order entered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and the September 21, 2026 and September 22, 2026 injunctions entered by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri are stayed, absent any further order of this court lifting such stays. The prior stay entered by this court on September 10, 2026, likewise remains in effect pending any further order of this court lifting that stay. The District Court and Court of Appeals should not enjoin or otherwise prohibit the use of the 2022 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri. And the District Court and Court of Appeals should not order or otherwise require Missouri to use the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri. It is so ordered. No dissents were noted. Thank you for listening. Please help us by rating and reviewing this podcast wherever you get your podcasts. And make sure you subscribe so you get not only all of the OT26 upcoming decisions delivered to your device, but also these various shadow docket or emergency docket orders and opinions as they are released. If you wish to communicate with the podcast, please email us at SCOTUSDisions at gmail.com. Thanks and have a great day.
