In the midterm elections of 1922, Missouri voters rejected an amendment to increase politicians' pay and a law that would have redrawn the state’s congressional districts. Two years prior, Republicans had passed a gerrymandered map, which Democrats sought to reverse through a referendum. In March 1922, Missouri's secretary of state confirmed that Democrats had gathered enough signatures for the ballot, leading to over sixty percent of voters opposing the Republican map.
Fast forward to September 2025, Missouri Republicans again passed a gerrymandered map, maintaining a significant advantage in congressional seats. President Donald Trump and his allies aimed to redraw electoral districts to target House Democrats, including Emanuel Cleaver, a congressman whose district was altered to extend into rural areas.
Richard von Glahn, the policy director of a local workers’-rights organization, initiated efforts to organize town halls and establish a group called People Not Politicians to pursue a referendum similar to the one in 1922. By December, they claimed to have gathered nearly three times the required signatures, but on August 4th, Secretary of State Denny Hoskins declared the referendum illegal, asserting that redistricting power belonged to the state legislature. However, the state Supreme Court later ruled unanimously that the referendum petition was valid, effectively nullifying the new map.
Following this, Hoskins and Attorney General Catherine Hanaway appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which rejected the appeal. A federal court subsequently ruled that the new map must be used for the November elections, leading von Glahn to appeal to the Supreme Court again, which issued a stay on the new map. The situation remained unresolved as officials began absentee voting using the old map.
County clerks expressed concerns about voter confusion due to the ongoing changes. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately ruled against the new map, stating that its use would lead to electoral chaos. Many voters had already been disenfranchised by voting for candidates who would not appear on their fall ballots.
Cleaver noted the national attention on Missouri's situation, highlighting a broader redistricting battle fueled by Trump's influence. This ongoing conflict reflects both immediate Republican strategies and a longer-term struggle as Democrats respond to Republican maneuvers. While gerrymandering is a longstanding practice, Trump's recent actions have intensified the competition.
In various states, redistricting efforts have yielded mixed results. Republicans in Texas and North Carolina aimed to create favorable districts, while Democrats in California responded by suspending a nonpartisan commission to redraw maps. The Indiana redistricting effort failed, and Virginia voters approved a referendum to gain Democratic seats. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Louisiana v. Callais weakened protections against racial gerrymandering, allowing Republicans to create additional favorable seats in several states.
Despite some states refraining from immediate redistricting, the changes have sparked backlash among Black voters. The House Democrats' campaign arm is now focusing resources on contested gerrymandered seats, indicating the ongoing significance of these electoral battles.