Key Takeaways:
• A lawsuit challenges the Missouri gerrymander as unconstitutional.
• The state constitution bans mid-decade redistricting.
• The new map splits Kansas City into three odd districts.
• Plaintiffs say the plan discriminates by race.
• A voter petition could pause the map until a public vote.
The Missouri gerrymander is now in court. The elections watchdog Campaign Legal Center joined the ACLU of Missouri to sue over a new congressional map. They filed the case in Jackson County state circuit court. Their main claim is simple: the map breaks the state constitution.
What is in the Missouri gerrymander lawsuit?
First, the lawsuit says state law forbids any map change before the next census. In 1955, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled each census should set one map for ten years. However, Republicans redrew the lines in 2025. They did this to protect their party after a push from a former president. Now the plaintiffs want an injunction to stop the map’s use.
Compact districts requirement
Moreover, the state constitution demands compact districts. The old map drew a neat near-rectangle around much of the Kansas City metro area. By contrast, the Missouri gerrymander splits Kansas City into three separate districts. One stretches north for over a hundred miles. Another reaches into rural counties far to the south. This fragmentation makes it hard for communities to share common interests.
Racial bias in the map
Furthermore, the suit claims the Missouri gerrymander draws lines that segregate voters by race. The new plan carves out a narrow “giraffe neck” appendage in the Fourth District. This weird shape runs into the Fifth District on a strictly racial basis. Plaintiffs say there is no legal reason to divide districts this way. They argue the map dilutes the voting power of Black and other minority communities.
Sloppy process and mapping errors
Even more, the lawsuit alleges lawmakers rushed the process. They passed two versions of the map by mistake. In one case, a single precinct in Kansas City ended up in both districts at the same time. That created malapportioned and noncontiguous districts. These errors, they say, show the mapmakers did not follow proper procedures.
Who is behind the lawsuit?
The Campaign Legal Center leads the legal challenge. Its redistricting strategist Mark Gaber spoke out on social media. He highlighted the map’s many flaws. The ACLU of Missouri adds firepower and expertise on civil rights issues. Together, they seek to protect fair representation and uphold the rule of law.
What the suit asks for
The plaintiffs want the court to block the new map immediately. They ask for an injunction to keep election officials from using the illegal boundaries in upcoming races. If granted, the state must revert to the old map until this case ends or until a new one follows constitutional rules.
Potential pushback from the state supreme court
However, the Missouri Supreme Court could decide this case. All current justices were appointed by Republicans, which makes the outcome uncertain. The state will likely defend its map by citing its recent legislative approval. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs rely on long-standing state constitutional text and past court rulings.
Voter petition effort could pause the map
In addition, activists are gathering signatures for a ballot measure. If they collect enough valid names, they can force a public vote on the new map. That move would automatically suspend the map until voters approve it. This second challenge gives opponents a non-judicial path to block the Missouri gerrymander.
Why this matters
Redistricting shapes political power for a decade. When lawmakers redraw lines, they can choose to help or hurt certain voters. A map that unfairly favors one party can tilt elections for years. That outcome affects which laws get passed and which leaders get elected. Therefore, fair maps matter to all residents.
How the map affects people on the ground
Kansas City residents face the biggest changes. Their community now splits into three districts. One resident might find their neighborhood in a district that stretches across half the state. This change can weaken their voice in Congress. It also makes it harder to organize around local issues, like public transit or school funding.
What’s next for the Missouri gerrymander?
First, the circuit court judge will decide whether to halt the map. If an injunction is granted, the old map stays in place while the case moves forward. Next, either side could appeal to the state supreme court. That process may take months or longer. Meanwhile, the petition effort continues. If enough voters sign, the map waits for a statewide vote.
Lessons for other states
Missouri’s fight highlights how redistricting can spark legal drama. Many states have rules about when and how to redraw maps. Some forbid mid-decade changes. Others require independent commissions. In states without clear limits, lawmakers can face lawsuits and public backlash. Thus, Missouri’s story could guide future redistricting fights elsewhere.
Keeping an eye on the outcome
Citizens who care about fair elections will watch closely. A ruling against the Missouri gerrymander could protect voter rights in this state and beyond. Yet a decision in favor of the map could encourage similar moves nationwide. In either case, the courts will set a key precedent on redistricting power.
Frequently asked questions
What exactly is the Missouri gerrymander?
It is the new congressional map approved mid-decade by Missouri’s legislature. Critics say it breaks state rules and unfairly divides voters.
Who filed the lawsuit against the map?
The Campaign Legal Center and the ACLU of Missouri filed the case in Jackson County circuit court.
What does the lawsuit ask the court to do?
The suit seeks an immediate injunction to stop the map’s use and a ruling that it violates the state constitution.
Can voters block the new map?
Yes. Activists are collecting signatures for a ballot measure that could pause the map until voters approve it.
How long could this legal fight last?
The case may stretch from months to over a year, especially if it reaches the state supreme court.