In one of the wildest legal battles I know of, the 8th Cir has ordered Missouri to go back to using the new 7-1 map created by the Republican legislature (and among other events subsequently found to be unlawful by the Missouri Suprme Court). It's like watching a ping pong match. Anyway, it appears Missouri will use the map that favors the Republicans, unless the US Supremes reverse it again.

https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2026/09/21/8th-circuit-mo-n2207047

7-1 the new 6-7?

Go Missouri!

Ag87H2O said:

---

Bulldog73 said:

---

In one of the wildest legal battles I know of, the 8th Cir has ordered Missouri to go back to using the new 7-1 map created by the Republican legislature (and among other events subsequently found to be unlawful by the Missouri Suprme Court). It's like watching a ping pong match. Anyway, it appears Missouri will use the map that favors the Republicans, unless the US Supremes reverse it again.

https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2026/09/21/8th-circuit-mo-n2207047

---

Good. The 8th circuit got it right.

---

Another Obama/Biden judge in on three, two one....

doubledog said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Bulldog73 said:

---

In one of the wildest legal battles I know of, the 8th Cir has ordered Missouri to go back to using the new 7-1 map created by the Republican legislature (and among other events subsequently found to be unlawful by the Missouri Suprme Court). It's like watching a ping pong match. Anyway, it appears Missouri will use the map that favors the Republicans, unless the US Supremes reverse it again.

https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2026/09/21/8th-circuit-mo-n2207047

---

Good. The 8th circuit got it right.

---

Another Obama/Biden judge in on three, two one....

---

A per curiam SCOTUS told Missouri to cut the bs. The 2022 map is the one you will use. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/26a388_q86b.pdf

HTownAg98 said:

---

doubledog said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Bulldog73 said:

---

In one of the wildest legal battles I know of, the 8th Cir has ordered Missouri to go back to using the new 7-1 map created by the Republican legislature (and among other events subsequently found to be unlawful by the Missouri Suprme Court). It's like watching a ping pong match. Anyway, it appears Missouri will use the map that favors the Republicans, unless the US Supremes reverse it again.

https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2026/09/21/8th-circuit-mo-n2207047

---

Good. The 8th circuit got it right.

---

Another Obama/Biden judge in on three, two one....

---

A per curiam SCOTUS told Missouri to cut the bs. The 2022 map is the one you will use. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/26a388_q86b.pdf

---

If the law requires a voter referendum before the new map can be used, then it makes sense to use the old map until the legally required referendum takes place.

Additionally, it would seem wrong to use a different map for the general election than the one used for the primaries.

taxpreparer said:

---

Any more wrong than allowing NY and CA to keep the Representatives they should have lost in the last incorrect census. Both states lost population, while TX and a few other states gained. The gaining states were cheated out if increased representation while CA and NY retained reforestation they were not entitled to. This miscarriage of justice will apparently continue until the 2030 census, having affected the 2024 election, and affecting 2026, 2028, and 2030.

---

We need to devise a way to correct the representation when such census errors occur and get Congress to pass it. without such changes, it appears that the only thing we can do is wait until the 2030 census.

The way to dealing with such issues is to change the law and live with the law. That applies to both situations.

By the way, what was the source of the census errors? Was it malicious or was it actual error?

eric76 said:

---

taxpreparer said:

---

Any more wrong than allowing NY and CA to keep the Representatives they should have lost in the last incorrect census. Both states lost population, while TX and a few other states gained. The gaining states were cheated out if increased representation while CA and NY retained reforestation they were not entitled to. This miscarriage of justice will apparently continue until the 2030 census, having affected the 2024 election, and affecting 2026, 2028, and 2030.

---

We need to devise a way to correct the representation when such census errors occur and get Congress to pass it. without such changes, it appears that the only thing we can do is wait until the 2030 census.

The way to dealing with such issues is to change the law and live with the law. That applies to both situations.

By the way, what was the source of the census errors? Was it malicious or was it actual error?

---

Honestly. I do not remember the source, and I believe there was some bias, but mostly errors in methodology.

Okay, I found this at cenus.gov.

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/05/2020-census-undercount-overcount-rates-by-state.html

Eight state were significantly over counted (CA was not one of them, my mistake.) Six states were significantly under counted. This was attributed to Covid-19 and counting methodology. It did affect Congressional and Electorial College representation.

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

eric76 said:

---

By the way, what was the source of the census errors? Was it malicious or was it actual error?

---

Malicious Incompetence.

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

No and no.

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

The are not the same though, its been reversed to 6-2 map again. So 7-1 was primary and now 6-2 is general. Its the argument the appeals court used to overturn the state Supreme Court to bring it back to 7-1 map before SCOTUS punted it back to the 6-2 map.

FatZilla said:

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

The are not the same though, its been reversed to 6-2 map again. So 7-1 was primary and now 6-2 is general. Its the argument the appeals court used to overturn the state Supreme Court to bring it back to 7-1 map before SCOTUS punted it back to the 6-2 map.

---

I thought that had used the older map in the primary.

Since the newer map had yet to be approved by voters in a referendum, then maybe they should take a really good look at whoever chose the new map.

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

They used the new map for the primary.

Voters are now being required to potentially vote in a district with no candidates that they were able to vote for in the primary,

But, that's not a "threat to democracy"...

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

The are not the same though, its been reversed to 6-2 map again. So 7-1 was primary and now 6-2 is general. Its the argument the appeals court used to overturn the state Supreme Court to bring it back to 7-1 map before SCOTUS punted it back to the 6-2 map.

---

I thought that had used the older map in the primary.

Since the newer map had yet to be approved by voters in a referendum, then maybe they should take a really good look at whoever chose the new map.

---

The Missouri legislature passed the new map last year, and a group gathered signatures for a petition to put the new map to a vote, and submitted the signatures in December 2025, before the effective date of the new maps. The Missouri secretary of state sat on the petition until the day before the primary election, then rejected it, and held the primary election using the new map. Earlier this month, the Missouri Supreme Court said that the secretary of state wrongly rejected the petition, and because of that, the petition prevented the redistricting bill from going into effect, so the primary election was held using maps that never went into effect.

The secretary of state argued to the Missouri Supreme Court that using the old map for the general after the new map for the primary would cause confusion, expense, and practical difficulties, and the Missouri Supreme Court told him that the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties were caused by the secretary of state sitting on the petition until the day before the primary election.

Your ire should be aimed at the Missouri Secretary of State who ****ed around and found out.

On top of what was said in the above post, the US Supreme Court noted yesterday that the Secretary of State was on notice as of May 2026 by the Missouri Supreme Court that sitting on the petition was playing with fire while holding a can of gasoline

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Your ire should be aimed at the Missouri Secretary of State who ****ed around and found out.

On top of what was said in the above post, the US Supreme Court noted yesterday that the Secretary of State was on notice as of May 2026 by the Missouri Supreme Court that sitting on the petition was playing with fire while holding a can of gasoline

---

Yeah...

As opposed to you and your lawfare mafia.

But keep on pretending that you're "defending democracy" as you work to break it down from the inside.

Ag with kids said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Your ire should be aimed at the Missouri Secretary of State who ****ed around and found out.

On top of what was said in the above post, the US Supreme Court noted yesterday that the Secretary of State was on notice as of May 2026 by the Missouri Supreme Court that sitting on the petition was playing with fire while holding a can of gasoline

---

Yeah...

As opposed to you and your lawfare mafia.

But keep on pretending that you're "defending democracy" as you work to break it down from the inside.

---

I would be opposed to the illegal act regardless of the politics involved.

If state and federal officials refuse to obey the law, how long can Democracy survive?

Suppose it had been the Democrats pulling the stupid trick? Would you be applauding them?

eric76 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Your ire should be aimed at the Missouri Secretary of State who ****ed around and found out.

On top of what was said in the above post, the US Supreme Court noted yesterday that the Secretary of State was on notice as of May 2026 by the Missouri Supreme Court that sitting on the petition was playing with fire while holding a can of gasoline

---

Yeah...

As opposed to you and your lawfare mafia.

But keep on pretending that you're "defending democracy" as you work to break it down from the inside.

---

I would be opposed to the illegal act regardless of the politics involved.

If state and federal officials refuse to obey the law, how long can Democracy survive?

Suppose it had been the Democrats pulling the stupid trick? Would you be applauding them?

---

The problem is the dems cheat in every way possible. So **** them!

Ag with kids said:

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

They used the new map for the primary.

Voters are now being required to potentially vote in a district with no candidates that they were able to vote for in the primary,

But, that's not a "threat to democracy"...

---

You don't get to say it's a threat to democracy when the Missouri SOS created the threat to democracy.

We can objectively call a spade a spade.

eric76 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Your ire should be aimed at the Missouri Secretary of State who ****ed around and found out.

On top of what was said in the above post, the US Supreme Court noted yesterday that the Secretary of State was on notice as of May 2026 by the Missouri Supreme Court that sitting on the petition was playing with fire while holding a can of gasoline

---

Yeah...

As opposed to you and your lawfare mafia.

But keep on pretending that you're "defending democracy" as you work to break it down from the inside.

---

I would be opposed to the illegal act regardless of the politics involved.

If state and federal officials refuse to obey the law, how long can Democracy survive?

Suppose it had been the Democrats pulling the stupid trick? Would you be applauding them?

---

No. But, I would make the same argument.

There will be a significant number of people in Missouri who will have to vote in a general election where they had no chance to choose either candidate in the primary.

The Dems always talk about "disenfranchisement". Well...here it is. Courtesy of Democratic lawfare. And they're too blinded by their win-at-all-cost mentality to see the irony.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

They used the new map for the primary.

Voters are now being required to potentially vote in a district with no candidates that they were able to vote for in the primary,

But, that's not a "threat to democracy"...

---

You don't get to say it's a threat to democracy when the Missouri SOS created the threat to democracy.

---

Oh horse*****

This is 100% on the lawfare of the left.

Ag with kids said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

They used the new map for the primary.

Voters are now being required to potentially vote in a district with no candidates that they were able to vote for in the primary,

But, that's not a "threat to democracy"...

---

You don't get to say it's a threat to democracy when the Missouri SOS created the threat to democracy.

---

Oh horse*****

This is 100% on the lawfare of the left.

---

If the SOS hadn't played gamesmanship with this and waited until it was too late, the map could have been in place. But he decided to f around and see if SCOTUS would go along with it. And he found out in a 9-0 decision.
You're just mad because you don't know what all was going on. That's understandable, because it was incredibly complicated to follow. But once you figure it out, you will quickly understand that the Missouri SOS tried to play a game of chicken and lost.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

eric76 said:

---

FatZilla said:

---

With this reversal, i wonder if it opens the state up to a lawsuit by any candidate who lost a primary that was effected by this shift? Can they force a block on the official vote and a re-primary? Doubt that legal theory has ever had an official case.

---

Using the same election maps for both the primary and the general, there shouldn't be a shift.

Also, Federal Law sets the date of the election for federal seats.

Quote:

---

2 U.S. Code 7 - Time of election

The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

---

---

They used the new map for the primary.

Voters are now being required to potentially vote in a district with no candidates that they were able to vote for in the primary,

But, that's not a "threat to democracy"...

---

You don't get to say it's a threat to democracy when the Missouri SOS created the threat to democracy.

---

Oh horse*****

This is 100% on the lawfare of the left.

---

If the SOS hadn't played gamesmanship with this and waited until it was too late, the map could have been in place. But he decided to f around and see if SCOTUS would go along with it. And he found out in a 9-0 decision.
You're just mad because you don't know what all was going on. That's understandable, because it was incredibly complicated to follow. But once you figure it out, you will quickly understand that the Missouri SOS tried to play a game of chicken and lost.

---

No. I do understand. Sure, there was gamesmanship on the right, too. But, it doesn't change the fact that left wing lawfare will disenfranchise a significant number of voter by forcing the old map to be used for the general.

Which could have been avoided if the SoS had decided on the referendum earlier.

Whatever mapped used in the primary should be used in the general, unless you are going to redo the primaries before the general.

At this point that is what is most just to the electorate, just to the people in choosing their representation.

Anything else is disenfranchisement of the voters who cast their ballots in the primary.

This follows the same legal principle developed under COVID. The principle of "we certainly ****ed up and disregarded the law, but since we didn't fix that in time it would be inappropriate to fix anything until its too late to fix anything".

HTownAg98 said:

---

Which could have been avoided if the SoS had decided on the referendum earlier.

---

Perhaps.

But, it was left wing lawfare combating the map...so...

The legislature passed the new map. That is the will of the people. Not signatures on a petition (a mere fraction of the voting population) fighting it.

The default should be the map passed by the legislature, until a petition is successful, not merely on the ballot.

Oh, you can complain about the sos. Guess what? Who elected him too? Yes, the people of Missouri. And he acted upon legal advice he was given by the attorney general of the state AND a lower court had agreed with him in rejecting the petition.

As a Missouri voter, I feel completely disenfranchised. The left is hijacking this solidly red state via how this played out.

Aston04 said:

---

The legislature passed the new map. That is the will of the people. Not signatures on a petition (a mere fraction of the voting population) fighting it.

The default should be the map passed by the legislature, until a petition is successful, not merely on the ballot.

Oh, you can complain about the sos. Guess what? Who elected him too? Yes, the people of Missouri. And he acted upon legal advice he was given by the attorney general of the state AND a lower court had agreed with him in rejecting the petition.

As a Missouri voter, I feel completely disenfranchised. The left is hijacking this solidly red state via how this played out.

---

Exactly. Who cares if D voters are upset, crush them.

To use the new map legally, it must be approved by the citizens of the state in a referendum.

The problem was caused by the Missouri of State deciding that legalities don't matter. The Secretary of State knew that a referendum was required but ignored that and chose to use the new map even though it had never been legally approved by the voters.

Blame the Secretary of State for this mess. If he had followed the law instead of brazenly flouting it, there would not be an issue.