Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
US Midterms 2026
24SEP

Supreme Court stays the Missouri TRO

2 min read
11:45UTC

All nine justices were needed to undo a single district judge's order, two days after one justice alone had been enough to leave a state court's injunction standing.

PoliticsDeveloping
Key takeaway

Nine justices were required to stop one district judge from overriding Missouri's own Supreme Court.

The US Supreme Court stayed Judge Stephen R. Clark's restraining order in Onder v. State of Missouri on 10 September, with no dissent noted⁠1. Justice Brett Kavanaugh put this application to the full bench instead of ruling on it himself, the opposite of his handling of the state's own application two days earlier. A stay suspends another court's ruling while an appeal proceeds, so Clark's command to use HB 1 stopped operating that day.

Kavanaugh's signature alone sufficed to let a state court's injunction stand on 8 September. Cancelling a federal judge's interference with that same injunction took all nine justices two days later. Whatever the Court thinks of mid-decade redistricting, it treated a district judge overriding a state Supreme Court on election administration as the question deserving nine votes.

Missouri's 2022 boundaries now govern the 3 November vote, which is the result the state Supreme Court reached on 3 September. On that same ballot, Missouri Proposition A asks voters whether HB 1 should take effect at all; approval would bring the map into force 30 days later, around 3 December, too late to touch a single 2026 race. Maryland's highest court put a comparable redistricting question back before its own voters in early September. Two states have now handed the drawing of congressional lines to a referendum after the courts ran out of room.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

the Supreme Court paused Judge Clark's order, so Missouri no longer has to use the HB 1 map under that federal case. Lawyers call this a stay: it pauses a lower court's order temporarily and decides nothing about whether the map itself is legal. No justice publicly disagreed on the record, but that does not necessarily mean all nine agreed. the Court's emergency orders often do not show individual votes, so the public may never know exactly how each justice came down.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

A stay pending appeal turns on the four-factor test the Court set out in Nken v. Holder: likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm absent a stay, the balance of harms between the parties, and the public interest. A majority satisfied on those factors can issue a stay without ever ruling on the merits of whether HB 1 or the 2022 map is lawful.

That structure is why Thursday's order settles which map Missouri uses for now while leaving the underlying legal question, which map the state constitution actually permits, undecided and still pending below.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    The stay leaves the 2022 map as the operative map for now, without deciding whether HB 1 is constitutionally valid, so the underlying dispute remains live below.

  • Risk

    Because the order carries no recorded vote, any later claim about which justices supported it will be difficult to verify against the public record.

First Reported In

Update #17 · Missouri's election chief held in contempt

CourtListener· 15 Sept 2026
Read original →
Causes and effects
Different Perspectives
Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins
Missouri and Secretary of State Denny Hoskins
Missouri and Hoskins, held in contempt by the state's own supreme court on 10 September for prematurely reverting to HB 1, filed against a pause of the 8th Circuit's order restoring the same 2025 map.
Richard von Glahn and People Not Politicians
Richard von Glahn and People Not Politicians
Von Glahn and People Not Politicians filed emergency application 26A388 on 22 September asking Justice Kavanaugh to pause the 8th Circuit's order restoring the 2025 map, days after Missouri mailed overseas ballots under the 2022 lines. A refusal to pause it would leave those ballots carrying the wrong districts.
Harmeet Dhillon, Justice Department
Harmeet Dhillon, Justice Department
Dhillon said the department will send about 1,000 election monitors to Nevada, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island in November, calling it "the biggest DOJ election observer effort in history" and citing "67 election-related indictments and convictions" against 13 under the Biden administration.
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and co-plaintiffs
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and co-plaintiffs
The NAACP and eight other groups sued DHS in Washington on 18 September to keep ICE away from polling places, citing federal statutes barring armed officers and troops at elections. The suit follows a released 2025 DHS email listing non-English-language voting jurisdictions beside a Justice Department prosecution checklist.
Cook Political Report
Cook Political Report
Cook wrote that "the amount of money national Republicans have dedicated to this race is a flashing red light for Democrats" when it moved New Hampshire from Lean Democrat to Toss Up on 15 September, citing the NRSC's $5.18m for Sununu. It is the one state where Republican spending and the rating move the same direction.
Democratic Senate strategists
Democratic Senate strategists
Strategists note the DSCC held a $37.6m cash lead over the NRSC's $18.7m at the end of August, after coordinating just $1.00m of spending itself. One reading holds the committee is banking that cash for the campaign's final weeks rather than matching Republican spending dollar-for-dollar in August.