The Missouri Supreme Court on Sept. 10 found Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in contempt for not obeying its directive to use a 2022 congressional map for the Nov. 3 elections, but declared he had remedied the contempt by conceding defeat.
After changing course and agreeing to use the 2022 map, Hoskins was not fined or given jail time.
The ruling came amid a flurry of court orders dealing with whether the 2022 map or a 2025 map should be used.
The 2022 map, drawn by the Legislature after the 2020 Census, was designed to give Republicans a 6–2 edge. The 2025 map was drawn to give them a 7–1 advantage. President Donald Trump backed the 2025 map as part of a mid-decade redistricting push to help Republicans keep their majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Earlier on Sept. 10, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the 2025 map for the second time in recent days.
Shortly before the Missouri Supreme Court issued its contempt ruling, Hoskins said the state will use the 2022 map.
“Following the United States Supreme Court’s stay, the only governing court order in effect is from the Missouri Supreme Court,” he said in a statement.
“In accordance with that order, my Office is directing local election authorities to use the 2022 congressional map.”
The contempt hearing went ahead hours earlier, after a federal judge the night before declined to halt the Missouri Supreme Court contempt hearing for Hoskins arising from the dispute over which congressional map the state would use in November.
The order by U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark denying the state’s request to block the hearing was issued before midnight on Sept. 9.
The state high court on Sept. 3 had directed Hoskins not to use the map approved by the Legislature in 2025 in the Nov. 3 general election. The court ruled that the law authorizing that map never took effect because a valid referendum petition that was pending had the effect of suspending it.
In the contempt case, the Missouri Supreme Court said Hoskins violated its Sept. 3 order by advising local election officials by email on Sept. 8 that they should prepare to move forward with using the 2025 map in November. The state court ordered him to appear Sept. 10 for a show-cause hearing to explain why he should not be held in contempt.
U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark on Sept. 8 blocked Hoskins from using any map other than the 2025 map.
Clark issued a 14-day temporary restraining order saying Missouri officials had no choice but to use the 2025 map authorized by House Bill 1 (HB 1) because doing otherwise would violate the U.S. Constitution. State officials said at the time that they would follow Clark’s ruling.
“Using any map other than HB 1’s for the general election creates two classes of voters: those who happen to stay in their HB 1 congressional districts, and those who do not,” Clark said in his ruling.
Without the restraining order, many Missouri voters would have “to cast their general-election votes for candidates whom they had no role in nominating.”
Late on Sept. 9, Clark denied the request to block the Missouri Supreme Court’s contempt hearing.
Clark said halting a state supreme court hearing before it even happens would be “an extraordinary measure,” affecting a sovereign state’s court.
“No profit would be gained by upsetting the federalism and comity principles at hand.”
During the morning portion of the contempt hearing on Sept. 10 in the state capital of Jefferson City, Hoskins was still taking the position that the 2025 map should be used.
Chief Justice W. Brett Powell questioned Hoskins’s attorney, Missouri Deputy Solicitor General William Seidleck, about the unauthorized map.
“We’ve already conducted one primary election with a map that doesn’t exist,” Powell said. “Is it the secretary of state’s intention, if he’s successful on appeal, to conduct a second election with that map?”
Before the morning session got underway, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its order blocking the 2025 map.
While the hearing was in recess in Jefferson City, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ordered additional briefing and oral argument in the case.
Before the afternoon sitting began, Hoskins issued his statement recognizing the 2022 map. When the court convened, it issued its unanimous ruling on the contempt issue.
“A civil contemnor has the power to purge him or herself of any contempt by complying with the order of the court,” Powell wrote on behalf of the court.
Because Hoskins has “corrected his contumacious conduct” he has “purged himself of said contempt.”
We had a problem loading this article. Please enable javascript or use a different browser. If the issue persists, please visit our help center.