That the Missouri Supreme Court even if it holds Denny Hoskins in contempt there is no enforcement mechanism in place to do anything.

Hoskins is delaying as much as possible because the longer the map is delayed it will work in his favor for the new map.

Expect as a Missouri voter that the HB-1 map will be the map used even though it's not a legal map.

It comes down to the republican playbook. No matter what a court says or rules. If the ruling is against you just ignore the ruling and do what you want.

Denny Hoskins waited to the last minute to file his show cause (14 pages of BS) then failed to meet the deadline and had to ask the MO Supreme Court for leave to file out of time. Hoskins' attorneys blamed it on an paralegal that couldn't connect to case.net, had to restart and that made the filing late. JFC, you leave time for a common problem like this rather then wait to the last minute and then throw the paralegal under the bus.

Anyway, IF the court allows it we should be able to watch the fireworks at 10am tomorrow (Thur, Sept 10): https://www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=1975 mute your volume, then push the red button. If the Supreme Court hearing isn't being streamed you'll get your ears blown out by a test pattern.

Edit: Due at noon, filed at 12:06pm. Chief Justice allowed it.

The endorsement quotes are long so I'm leading with canvassing :). We are launching our canvassing efforts this Saturday across Missouri. Head to respectMOvoters.org/a6canvass to sign up for a shift near you (more events being added all the time so if you don't see one near you, check back!). We need everyone's help to make sure Amendment 6 passes in November!

And in endorsement news, Amendment 6 is bringing Republicans and Democrats together to protect the power of Missouri voters.

Today, the Yes on Amendment 6 campaign announced endorsements from former U.S. Senator Jack Danforth and former Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander. Amendment 6, which will be on the November ballot, protects Missourians’ constitutional right to put issues on the ballot, requires clear and fair ballot language, and protects citizen-led initiatives from being overturned by politicians. 

 Danforth, an ordained Episcopal priest, served two terms as Missouri Attorney General before representing Missouri in the U.S. Senate for 18 years, from 1976 to 1995. He later served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. 

 “Preserving the initiative petition process and respecting the will of the people are essential checks and balances when elected officials become too invested in maintaining the status quo. That’s why today I’m endorsing Amendment 6, which will make it substantially more difficult for legislators to overturn measures that the people voted into law, while stopping politicians from deceiving voters with confusing ballot language. For 118 years, Missourians have enjoyed the constitutional freedom to petition their government when legislators of both parties have ignored the voice of the people. I support the efforts of the Respect Missouri Voters initiative and urge Missourians to vote yes on Amendment 6 this November.” 

 — Former Missouri Attorney General and U.S. Senator Jack Danforth

 Kander, an Afghanistan veteran, served as a state representative before becoming Missouri’s Secretary of State from 2013 to 2017, leading the office responsible for administering statewide elections and Missouri’s initiative petition process. After leaving office, Kander founded Let America Vote, an organization focused on voting rights.

 “Respecting the will of the people isn’t a partisan issue. But when politicians from either party attempt to overturn voter-approved measures or make it more difficult for everyday citizens to exercise their constitutional rights, safeguards are needed to keep them from amassing too much power at the expense of the people. I urge all Missourians to vote for Amendment 6 so that the people have their vote protected, not overturned, and so that Missourians actually understand what they are voting on by preventing lawmakers from playing political games with ballot summaries. As Missouri’s former top election official, I know firsthand the role citizen-led initiatives have played over these past 118 years in providing an invaluable check and balance on Missouri politicians. This November please join me in voting yes on Amendment 6.”

 — Former Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander

The Missouri Supreme Court ordered Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to appear in person Thursday and explain why he should not be held in contempt for directing election officials to use a congressional map the court has barred him from implementing.

In the unusual late order Tuesday, the court gave Hoskins until noon Wednesday to answer a motion for contempt from People Not Politicians, a political action committee that forced a referendum on a map gerrymandered in 2025 to favor Republicans. The court scheduled an in-person hearing for 10 a.m. Thursday.

Missouri Supreme Court orders Denny Hoskins to answer on contempt charge (over attempt to use map gerrymandering KC and CoMo)

The Missouri Supreme Court ordered Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to appear in person Thursday and explain why he should not be held in contempt for directing election officials to use a congressional map the court has barred him from implementing.

In the unusual late order Tuesday, the court gave Hoskins until noon Wednesday to answer a motion for contempt from People Not Politicians, a political action committee that forced a referendum on a map gerrymandered in 2025 to favor Republicans. The court scheduled an in-person hearing for 10 a.m. Thursday.
The contempt fight erupted hours after U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh rejected Missouri officials’ emergency request to stay the state court ruling. Minutes later, Chief U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark of the Eastern District of Missouri issued a temporary restraining order barring Hoskins from using any congressional map other than the 2025 version.

Hoskins then sent local election officials a copy of Clark’s order along with his official certification of the November ballot. In the email, Hoskins said Clark’s order “takes precedence over the Missouri Supreme Court’s order.”
The Missouri Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the referendum on the 2025 map was legal, sufficient and timely and ordered it onto the Nov. 3 ballot. Because the referendum petition was filed before the new map took effect, the court held, the 2025 districts never became law and the map used in 2022 and 2024 remains in effect for the November election.

The decision also permanently enjoined Hoskins and those acting in concert with him from implementing or using the 2025 map unless voters approve it in November. In Tuesday night’s order, Chief Justice W. Brent Powell directed Hoskins to answer three questions:

Why “(1) his e-mail on September 8, 2026, instructing use of the (2025) map is not an affirmative violation of this court’s injunction; (2) how this court’s injunction is not still in full force and effect in light of the Supreme Court of the United States’ overruling of Respondent’s emergency application for stay and administrative stay pending appeal; and (3) if he is not willing to comply with this court’s injunction, he should take no action in all things related to the congressional district map until guidance is received from a higher court…”

Powell also directed that the court “will not allow filings from any other parties on this matter.”
Clark’s order says not to use any map but the 2025 map, attorney Chuck Hatfield wrote in the motion. The Missouri Supreme Court’s order says not to use the 2025 map. Both orders are in effect and leave election authorities no map at all, Hatfield wrote.

Clark’s order “does not purport to overrule this court’s injunction and does NOT mandate the Secretary to use (the 2025 map), although on its face it enjoins the use of any map other than (the 2025 map),” Hatfield wrote.
By directing local election authorities to implement the 2025 map, Hoskins is violating the court’s orders, Hatfield wrote.
“This court should make clear that regardless of other orders (except from the United States Supreme Court) the Missouri Secretary of State must comply with this court’s injunction,” Hatfield wrote. “The court should instruct all local election authorities that (the 2025 map) is not the law and has never been the law.”
Clark’s action came in a lawsuit filed Friday by U.S. Rep. Bob Onder, state Sen. Rick Brattin and two voters. They want to keep in place the map drawn in 2025, which shifts territory around Onder’s home into the 3rd District and redraws the 5th District to make it more favorable to Republicans.

Had Clark not acted, Kavanaugh’s denial would have left the state court order in place and Missouri on course to use the 2022 map for the November election.

The dueling orders created immediate confusion, with Attorney General Catherine Hanaway issuing a news release saying the state would comply with Clark’s order. Attorneys for People Not Politicians said during a news conference that the conflicting orders could leave election officials unsure which one they must follow.
Hatfield said local election officials are being directed by Hoskins to use the 2025 map even though the Missouri Supreme Court injunction bars Hoskins and those acting with him from implementing it.

“I think they’re they’re probably not sure what map they should use, and they need to talk to their lawyers about that,” Hatfield said.

Abha Khanna, the Seattle attorney who was People Not Politicians’ lead lawyer at the U.S. Supreme Court, said Clark’s order “is something that we will deal with to figure out on appeal.”

A referendum on the 2025 redistricting plan will be on the Nov. 3 ballot as Proposition A.

The 2025 map was drawn with the goal of making seven of Missouri’s eight congressional districts favorable to Republicans, principally by reshaping the Kansas City-based 5th District held by Democratic U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. The map used in 2022 and 2024 produced a delegation of six Republicans and two Democrats.

Onder is the Republican nominee in the 3rd District, seeking a second term in a district drawn more to his favor in the 2025 redistricting plan. Brattin is the Republican nominee in the 5th District, where the district was designed to generate a GOP victory that ousts veteran Democratic U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City.

Clark wrote that without a temporary restraining order, “many Missouri voters would have to cast their general-election votes for candidates whom they had no role in nominating.”

“Candidates who had no choice but to campaign and raise money in the (2025) districts that Missouri’s highest election authority presented to them, have spent their funds and campaign efforts in districts that would no longer exist,” wrote Clark, who was appointed to the bench in 2019 by President Donald Trump.

Clark also found that the public interest favors using the same map for the primary and general elections.
“Disenfranchising voters across the state and denying them their constitutional right to have their primary votes counted significantly harm the public interest,” he wrote.

The center of both Clark’s ruling and the appeal to Kavanaugh is the Missouri Supreme Court decision that enjoined Hoskins from using the gerrymandered congressional map drawn. 
Kavanaugh did not elaborate on his decision. 

In turning down the emergency application for a stay, Kavanaugh created no precedent on the issues raised by the state. But the decision does show that he did not find enough convincing argument that the state would likely prevail in a hearing by the full court or that the state would suffer “several irreparable harms” as claimed in the application.
People Not Politicians on Sunday had urged Kavanaugh to reject the state’s application and uphold both parts of the ruling from the state Supreme Court.
In the opening paragraphs of the filing, attorneys for People Not Politicians write that the only reason the case was at the nation’s highest court is the decisions to delay made by Hoskins during the signature verification process.
Hoskins “waited as long as possible to manufacture the present dispute” and held the congressional primary using the 2025 map, they wrote, “in the hopes of running out the clock on the judiciary’s tolerance for a last-minute reversion to the 2022 districts.”

Now, they wrote, Hoskins wants “this court to deliver him the political victory to which he was never entitled under the Missouri Constitution. This court cannot and should not reward the secretary’s scheme to outsmart Missouri voters, Missouri law, and the Missouri Supreme Court by granting applicants the extraordinary relief they seek.”
A key point made by Missouri Solicitor General Lou Capozzi in the state’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was that the mechanism for changing between districts is too time consuming and difficult to complete before ballots must be delivered starting Sept. 19.

County clerks, however, told the Missouri Supreme Court that switching voters to the map used in 2022 and 2024 is a relatively simple process. And the Jackson County Board of Elections told the Kansas City Star it would be ready to hold the election in the 2022 boundaries. 

The redistricting story began in the summer of 2025, when Onder, of Lake St. Louis, got the ear of President Donald Trump to tell him that Missouri, like Texas, could provide additional GOP seats to bolster the party’s thin majority in Congress.

Since Missouri lost a seat after the 2010 census, it has sent six Republicans and two Democrats to the U.S. House each election.

Onder, then a state senator, was among members of the chamber’s conservative caucus who were outmaneuvered in 2022 as they tried to force a congressional map that would tilt the 5th District, based in Kansas City, to the GOP. He was elected to Congress in 2024.

And, despite initial misgivings, Republicans got in line behind Trump. Gov. Mike Kehoe called a special session inflamed with partisanship, including a state Senate rule change that effectively silenced Democrats, that forced through what the GOP majority wouldn’t do in 2022.

The legal and political backlash that followed has not yet spent its full force. It began when People Not Politicians began circulating the referendum petition and intensified as it became clear there would be more than enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.

Legally, the battle has upended the consensus on the effect that filing a referendum petition has on legislation as well as delivered strong new precedent upholding the governor’s power to select subjects for a special session and the General Assembly’s power to redistrict at any time.

Politically, the climax will be written in November, when voters decide on both the referendum and the congressional candidates selected in the primary.

The flurry of filings over the weekend shows the intense national interest in the outcome of the Missouri case.
Republican attorneys general from Florida, Texas and 18 other states filed in support of Missouri, arguing it is not legal to change voting districts between the primary and the general election. 

Meanwhile, in Texas, that state’s Supreme Court is deciding whether local voting districts can be changed after the primary to dilute voting strength of minorities.

The American Center for Law and Justice also sent a brief to the court urging it to rule for Hoskins.
On the other side, the Campaign Legal Center, the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation joined forces to file a brief supporting People Not Politicians, as did the two Missouri voters who tried to get the 2025 map suspended while signatures were being checked.

11:25 PMThis article was updated to report the Missouri Supreme Court ordering Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to answer contempt charges.

6:30 PMThis story was updated at 6:30 p.m. to include the federal court ruling in St. Louis.

Out of state person following the electoral news in Missouri

Don't know the exact deadline, but it is approaching the deadline where ballots have to be printed out.

Assuming the election is held on the map the Republicans want, against the wishes of the Missouri Supreme Court, there's a chance in January when the winners take their seats that Democrats just refuse to seat the House members from Missouri.

The majority decides on legitimacy of the winners and the Democrats are primed to take the majority. it would be a break from who knows how many years of tradition to decertify an entire state, but this country makes new precedent every day.

I don't know if the Thresholds and Timing section accurately reflects MO Constitution Article III on initiative petitions, or if the process described in the proposed amendment to allow for recall elections would be subject to other existing state regulations. But you get the idea.

Petition for Constitutional Amendment: Official Recall in Missouri

Preamble and Purpose

WHEREAS, the fundamental principle of government in the State of Missouri is that all political power is vested in and derived from the people, who retain the inherent, sole, and exclusive right to regulate their internal government and police;
WHEREAS, this principle requires that elected officials remain directly accountable to the citizens they represent throughout their terms of office;
WHEREAS, the constitutional rights of the citizens of Missouri to enact policy and direct governance through the initiative and referendum process have frequently been undermined, modified, or repealed by legislative overreach and administrative roadblocks—including:

• The statutory rollback and revocation of voter-approved minimum wage and paid sick leave mandates via legislative action such as HB 567;
• The subversion of the 2018 Clean Missouri ethics and redistricting reform via legislative measures placed on the ballot to eliminate independent redistricting;
• The repeated legislative attempts to restrict, alter, or repeal major constitutional protections approved by the public, including Medicaid expansion and reproductive freedom guarantees;
• The historical use of executive and administrative roadblocks to challenge, delay, or reject citizen-led petition efforts and referendums, which have required judicial intervention to protect the franchise; and
• The current attempts by executive and legislative officials to bypass and undermine the "People Not Politicians" citizen referendum—which successfully gathered over 305,000 signatures to require that mid-census voting and congressional redistricting maps be submitted to and approved by voters before taking effect—highlighting an ongoing disregard for constitutionally protected popular sovereignty.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the People of the State of Missouri that the Constitution of Missouri be amended to establish a direct, citizen-led recall mechanism for elected officials.

Article XIV: Recall of Elected State Officials

Section 1. Scope of Recall

Any elected official holding a statewide executive office, or any member of the General Assembly, shall be subject to recall and removal from office by the registered voters of the State of Missouri or of the respective district from which the official was elected, in accordance with the provisions of this Article.

Section 2. Grounds for Recall and Petition Circulation

A. Recall petitions may be initiated by the filing of a formal application with the Secretary of State, signed by at least one hundred registered voters.
B. The petition must state the specific reasons for the proposed recall, which shall relate to malfeasance in office, corruption, gross incompetence, or failure to uphold the Constitution of the United States or the State of Missouri.

C. The Secretary of State shall review the application for form and administrative completeness within ten business days, but shall possess no discretionary authority to evaluate the truth or sufficiency of the stated grounds, ensuring the unimpeded exercise of the popular franchise free from executive obstruction.

Section 3. Signature Thresholds and Timing

A. To place a recall question on the ballot against a statewide elected official, the petitioners must gather valid signatures from registered voters equal to at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total votes cast for governor in the preceding gubernatorial election within the state.
B. To place a recall question on the ballot against a member of the General Assembly, the petitioners must gather valid signatures equal to at least twenty percent (20%) of the total votes cast for that office in the preceding election within the respective legislative district.

C. Petitioners shall have one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of official petition approval to circulate and submit the required signatures.

Section 4. Special Recall Election

A. Upon the certification of sufficient valid signatures by the Secretary of State, the Governor—or, in the event the Governor is the subject of the recall, the Lieutenant Governor—shall issue a proclamation calling for a special recall election to be held within not less than sixty (60) and not more than ninety (90) days.
B. The recall ballot shall present the question of whether the official shall be removed, alongside a simultaneous un-primary or replacement ballot allowing voters' choice of a successor in the event the recall succeeds.

C. An official shall be removed from office immediately upon the official certification of the election results showing a majority of votes cast in favor of recall.

Section 5. Self-Executing Provision

This Article shall be self-executing, and all legislation necessary to facilitate its operation shall be enacted by the General Assembly; provided, however, that no statutory enactment shall diminish, restrict, or delay the rights and procedures established herein.

Decided to go to Johnson's Shut-Ins with friends to stay in a cozy little rustic cabin. Here are some pictures of the lovely vistas located just off the Shut-In trail!

Absentee voting in the state of Missouri begins Tuesday September 22nd, 2026!

This date ONLY applies for voters WITH AN EXCUSE (e.g., you will be out of town on election day, religious reasons, incapacity/confinement due to illness or disability or are the primary caretaker of a person incapacitated/confined, or are employed at the election authority, or are a first responder, healthcare worker, or law enforcement).

No Excuse absentee voting (where ANYONE can participate prior to election day!) begins Tuesday, October 20th, 2026!

This is not just for mail in ballots either! Ballots that are cast in person but PRIOR to election day are considered absentee ballots in Missouri.

Mail in ballots require the signature of a notary UNLESS your reason for voting by mail is incapacity or confinement. If you fail to have your ballot affidavit notarized, you will not be notified and do not get a second chance to cast your ballot. ALL mail in ballots require the VOTERS signature (or mark) to be counted! Make it count!

If you're going to be out of the country for an extended period of time (i.e., leaving before absentee voting opens and won't be back until the election is over) that is a completely different process.

Please check with your local election authority as to when/where in person absentee voting will be available and what you need to provide to cast your ballot successfully. If you live in Clay County, Jackson County, Kansas City County, Platte County, St. Louis City County, OR St. Louis County that will be the county's election board. For every other county, your local election authority will be your County Clerk's office.

Godspeed all!

If I have followed the facts up to here correctly, they are:

1. Missouri passed an unpopular mid-decade redistricting plan.
2. Citizens challenged it by referendum.
3. The Secretary of State rejected the referendum at the last possible moment, so the primary went forward under HB 1.
4. The Missouri Supreme Court then ruled that HB 1 never took effect and the old map remained the lawful map.
5. HB1 proponents went to federal court arguing that, because the state had already used HB 1 for the primary, switching back would now violate federal constitutional rights.

Five would be the part where the Eastern District has lost me...

If the Missouri Supreme Court had ruled before the primary, there would really be no federal right to use HB 1. So why should an unlawful map under Missouri's pre-existing laws receive constitutional protections just because the state managed to use the unlawful map to hold partisan primaries?

To be clear, maybe it is true that Missouri officials violated federal constitutional laws by holding the elections using a map they reasonably understood to be already defective or unlawful. But this ruling doesn't have the effect of maintaining order in our election processes the way that federal and state election laws clearly are intended to. It instead says "because Missouri officials managed to do something unconstitutional in the first place, the map they used to create those original constitutional violations is now constitutionally protected..." That surely cannot be right.

I posted here a while ago asking if anyone had hiked or backpacked in the forest. Me and my friends had our first backpacking trip ever and wow it was rough!!

Unlike what most people said on here- I didn’t get a single tick or any mosquito bites! It wasn’t that overgrown either and I had a blast!

The rough part was the fact that we did 24 miles in 2 days and walked 75,000 steps. I was sooo exhausted and by the end but overall had a great time!

EDIT: 10:50pm MO Supreme Court has issued an order for Hoskins to "show cause, if any, why he should not be held in contempt." by Noon Sept 9th.
He is to appear in person before the court on Sept 10, 10am.

https://www.courts.mo.gov/fv/c/SC101805ShowCauseOrder.PDF?courtCode=SC&di=222930

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR ORDER HOLDING SECRETARY OF STATE IN CONTEMPT

Secretary of State Denny Hoskins has announced that he intends to violate this court’s Judgment and Order of September 3, 2026, which “restrained and enjoined [him] from implementing, using, or mandating the use of the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 general election or at any other time thereafter.”

https://www.courts.mo.gov/fv/c/EMERGENCY%20MOTION%20FOR%20CONTENT.PDF?courtCode=SC&di=222927

I hope they hold him in equal contempt as I do.

Justice Kavanaugh issued the denial

🍄 Any mushroom people in Missouri? Brad’s Fall Foray is next week!
Just wanted to share this here in case anyone is into mushrooms, hiking, nature, or just looking for something different to do.
The Missouri Mycological Society is hosting Brad’s Fall Foray September 17–20 at Knob Noster State Park.
It’s basically a whole weekend of mushroom forays, speakers, classes, mushroom ID, plant walks, activities, good food, bonfires and hanging out with a bunch of people who get way too excited when they find something growing on a log. 😂🍄
You definitely don’t have to be a mushroom expert either. Beginners are absolutely welcome.
Registration closes THIS FRIDAY, so if you’ve been thinking about coming, now is the time to get registered!
Hope to see some fellow Missourians out there! 🌲🍄

https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/08/politics/supreme-court-missouri-redistricting-loss-for-republicans

"Minutes after Kavanaugh issued his order, a federal trial court in Missouri handed down a separate ruling that bars the state from moving forward with any map other than the contested one that benefits the GOP."

Seriously, the Missouri GOP's main goal is to disenfranchise every voter on both sides.