KANSAS CITY, Mo. — The Missouri Supreme Court issued opinions Tuesday in two cases concerning the state’s latest redistricting map.
Both opinions found the map meets constitutional requirements. As it is already in effect, it will stay in effect.
"Today's Missouri Supreme Court rulings are a huge victory for voters," Gov. Mike Kehoe said in a statement. "Missourians are more alike than we are different, and our Missouri values — rooted in common sense, hard work, and personal responsibility — are stronger and far more aligned across both sides of the aisle than the extreme left-wing agendas pushed in states like New York, California, and Illinois. The Missouri First Map ensures those values are represented fairly and accurately at every level of government. This August, Missouri voters will head to the ballot box to vote for candidates in these newly drawn districts."
The opinion in Elizabeth Healey, et al. v. State of Missouri, et al. stated residents failed to meet the burden required by Missouri law to demonstrate the map was unconstitutional.
This case raised an issue with Article III, Section 45 of the Missouri Constitution, which states that districts “shall be comprised of contiguous territory as compact and as nearly equal in population as may be.” But the court found the concerned residents were unable to prove the “legislature improperly deviated from the directives of article III, section 45.”
The second lawsuit, Jake Maggard, et al. v. State of Missouri, et al., took issue with which map was currently in effect. Residents gathered signatures they believed should stop the new map from going into effect until put before Missouri voters.
However, the court ruled unanimously that nothing in the constitution allows a referendum petition alone to automatically suspend legislation. It has yet to be determined if the referendum petition filing was “legal, sufficient and timely,” per the opinion.
Additional redistricting cases remain ongoing.
NAACP, et al. v. Kehoe will go before the Missouri Supreme Court on May 27. This case argues the governor didn’t have the power to call the “extraordinary session” in which the new redistricting map was adopted.
Additionally, People Not Politicians v. Hoskins will go before a judge in July. Though in a lower court, this case concerns the validity of the signatures people gathered to force a statewide vote on the map.
—
