Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins is asking a federal appeals court to revive the state’s disputed 2025 congressional map and remove a referendum challenging it from the November ballot, reopening a fight that had appeared to be nearing an end.
A three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear arguments Thursday. In a filing Tuesday, state Solicitor General Lou Capozzi, writing on Hoskins’ behalf, argued that using different congressional maps for the August primary and Nov. 3 general election violates the U.S. Constitution. He also argued that allowing a referendum to suspend a congressional map violates the Constitution’s Elections Clause.
The latest turn comes as Hoskins faces a lawsuit filed Friday by five St. Louis-area voters over his handling of the referendum. The proposed class-action lawsuit seeks up to $500 for each of about 162,000 voters whose petition signatures were verified — potentially totaling about $80 million.
The lawsuit relies on a Missouri law dating to 1945 that allows an aggrieved person to recover $100 to $500 through a civil action if the secretary of state “neglect[s] or refuse[s] to perform any of the duties enjoined on him by law.”
The lawsuit points to actions Hoskins took during the months-long legal battle over the congressional map Republican lawmakers passed during a 2025 special legislative session.
Last year, President Donald Trump pushed Republican-led states to conduct mid-decade redistricting to gain a partisan advantage. Missouri lawmakers approved a map making the Kansas City-based 5th District represented by Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver more favorable to Republicans. The GOP already holds six of Missouri’s eight congressional seats.
In response, People Not Politicians gathered more than 300,000 signatures seeking a statewide referendum on the map. Hoskins rejected the referendum Aug. 4, saying congressional redistricting was not subject to referendum.
The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously disagreed Sept. 3, ruling that the referendum was “legal, sufficient, and timely.” It determined that the petition suspended the 2025 map before it took effect and ordered Missouri to use the 2022 map in November.
The class-action lawsuit alleges Hoskins violated his statutory duties by refusing to certify the referendum and later directing local election officials to use the 2025 map despite the state Supreme Court’s order.
Joe D. Jacobson, an attorney representing plaintiffs Fernando Bermudez, Gregory Fletcher, Cara Mengwasser, John Payne and Joseph Welling, called Hoskins’ actions “inexcusable.”
“To be so flagrantly partisan and to knowingly not perform his duty in office in order to advance the goals of their political master is appalling,” Jacobson said. “How can the government run if people are intentionally not doing the job they’re ordered to do?”
If his firm wins, Jacobson hopes the case will deter other elected officials from disregarding their duties.
“This case that spanks the official for his actions, I think, is in the interest of the public,” Jacobson said. “If we are able to hit them pretty hard here, then hopefully some statewide elected officials, next time, won’t abuse their power.”
Hoskins declined to comment through spokeswoman Anne Marie Moy.
The map fight appeared to be winding down after the U.S. Supreme Court on Sept. 10 blocked a federal judge’s order requiring use of the 2025 map. Hoskins returned to the 2022 map after the Missouri Supreme Court found him in civil contempt for violating its order. The state court said he had remedied the contempt and imposed no penalty.
With the 2022 map back in place and the referendum headed to voters, opponents of the 2025 map expressed confidence that the battle was effectively over.
The federal effort to restore the 2025 map stood a “zero chance” of succeeding, former Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff told the Missouri Independent last week.
“The Supreme Court of Missouri is the final authority on what Missouri law is,” Wolff said, “and the court has said that (the 2025 map) is not the law and never was, because it has not been approved by a vote of the people.”
For the Republican plaintiffs to prevail, Wolff added, the 8th Circuit effectively would have to order Missouri to conduct an election using districts the state’s highest court determined were not legally in effect.
Richard von Glahn, executive director of People Not Politicians, agreed.
“At this point the law is the law, the gerrymandered map is properly suspended, it’s not in effect and we (voters) will make the final decisions when we vote in November,” von Glahn told The American.
As for Hoskins intervening in the electoral process again, von Glahn said, “Now that we’re here, I’m not concerned about Denny Hoskins anymore.”
But the legal fight was not over.
Hoskins is now asking the 8th Circuit to restore the 2025 map and find that allowing voters to suspend a congressional map through a referendum violates the U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause.
The appeal comes as election officials face a Friday deadline to mail ballots to military and overseas voters. County clerks have warned the court that another map change could disrupt election preparations.
Hoskins also faces a whistleblower lawsuit filed Monday by Nicholas La Strada, his former director of election integrity, who alleges he was fired in retaliation for reporting what he believed was misconduct.
La Strada alleges he raised concerns about public funds used for an anti-Proposition B mailer, the office’s handling of a certified election in Marshall and discussions about creating a false whistleblower complaint involving Missouri’s voter registration system for use in a federal proceeding.
La Strada alleges he reported his concerns to Hoskins and other senior officials and was fired days after testifying in the federal proceeding. He is seeking damages, attorneys’ fees and other relief under Missouri’s whistleblower protection law.
Hoskins also declined to comment on La Strada’s lawsuit.
Asked whether the Missouri Supreme Court’s contempt finding will help build the class-action case, Jacobson responded curtly.
“I don’t see how it could hurt.”
Sylvester Brown Jr. is the Deaconess Foundation Community Advocacy Fellow.