Introduction
On September 25, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a per curiam opinion in People Not Politicians v. Onder, No. 26A388, staying orders from a federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit that would have required Missouri to conduct its 2026 congressional elections using a 2025 redistricting map. The decision is the third intervention by the Court in this litigation within a matter of weeks, and it reinforces the Court's consistent position that the 2022 congressional map—not the 2025 map—must govern the 2026 election in Missouri.
Background: the Missouri redistricting dispute
The dispute originates with two separate redistricting maps enacted by the Missouri Legislature. The first was enacted in 2022 and governed elections to the U.S. House of Representatives. The second was enacted in 2025. According to the opinion, the Missouri Constitution—as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Missouri—provides that a new law does not take effect unless and until it is approved by voters in a referendum at the next election, provided that a sufficient number of voter signatures have been gathered to trigger that referendum process.
On September 3, 2026, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in von Glahn v. Hoskins that the 2025 redistricting map 'is not the law and has never been the law' in Missouri, and that it would not take effect unless approved by Missouri voters in the 2026 election. As a consequence, the Court held that the 2022 map—not the 2025 map—was the operative map for the 2026 congressional election as a matter of state law.
Prior federal court proceedings and this Court's earlier orders
Following the Missouri Supreme Court's September 3 ruling, a group of voters and candidates filed suit in federal court, arguing that the U.S. Constitution requires Missouri to use the 2025 map in the 2026 election notwithstanding its status under state law. The Missouri Secretary of State separately sought a stay of the Missouri Supreme Court's decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.
On September 8, 2026, Justice Kavanaugh, acting in his capacity as Circuit Justice for the Eighth Circuit, denied the Secretary of State's request, leaving the 2022 map in effect. That same evening, however, a federal district court in Missouri issued a temporary restraining order that, in practical effect, required Missouri to use the 2025 map—relief that the Circuit Justice had just declined to grant. The Eighth Circuit later characterized that order as 'in practical effect a preliminary injunction.'
On September 10, 2026, the full Supreme Court stayed the district court's September 8 injunction without any noted dissent, meaning the 2022 map would remain in use for the 2026 congressional election absent further order of the Court. The election then began under the 2022 map.
The Eighth Circuit's September 21 order and the Court's response
Eleven days after the Supreme Court's September 10 stay order, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ordered the district court to enter a permanent injunction requiring use of the 2025 map in the 2026 election. On September 22, the Eighth Circuit denied applicants' motion to recall the mandate and stay that order. The district court amended its injunction on September 22 as well.
The Supreme Court's per curiam opinion states that, given the Court's two prior orders in the litigation, 'our conclusion that this was error should come as no surprise.' Consistent with the September 10 stay order, the Court stayed the district court's September 21 and September 22 injunctions, as well as the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate and September 22 order.
The traditional stay factors
The Court noted that even setting aside its prior orders, the traditional stay factors articulated in Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009), independently support staying the lower court orders. On the merits, the Court observed that its precedents have not previously held that Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution requires a state to use the primary election map in a general election, and that the merits are therefore 'not entirely clearcut.' The Court cited Rodriguez v. Popular Democratic Party, 457 U.S. 1 (1982), in support of that framing.
On the equities, the Court emphasized that the election was not merely approaching but had already begun. Ballots printed under the 2022 map had been mailed, absentee voting had commenced, and military and overseas voting was underway. Local election officials in Missouri submitted that 'it is practically impossible to revert to the' 2025 'map' at that stage. The Court concluded that ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election 'would usher in electoral chaos.'
The Purcell principle and late electoral interventions
The Court grounded its equitable analysis in the Purcell principle, derived from Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1 (2006), which cautions against judicial alteration of election rules close to an election. The opinion also cited Allen v. Milligan, 608 U.S. 511 (2026), for the proposition that 'lower federal courts should not alter the election rules of a state on the eve of an election,' a formulation itself drawn from Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee, 589 U.S. 423 (2020).
The Court stated that the Purcell principle applies 'with even greater force here' because the election had already started rather than being merely imminent. The combination of ballots already printed and distributed, absentee voting already underway, and the practical impossibility of reverting to the 2025 map identified by local election authorities all weighed decisively in favor of maintaining the status quo established by the Court's September 10 order.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's per curiam opinion in People Not Politicians v. Onder reflects the Court's consistent application of the Purcell principle and traditional stay analysis in the context of an active election. The Court stayed the district court's September 21 and September 22 injunctions and the Eighth Circuit's corresponding orders, leaving the 2022 congressional map in effect for the 2026 Missouri congressional election. The opinion underscores that federal courts must exercise particular caution before intervening in state election administration, especially once voting has already begun, and that the unsettled state of the underlying constitutional question under Article I, Section 2 further counseled against granting the relief sought by the plaintiffs.
This article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Sources consulted
- People Not Politicians v. Onder - Supreme Court of the United States, United States
Published by Synojus International
Back to English publications