A Few More Thoughts On The Missouri Ruling

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Blackman, J. (2026, September 27). A Few More Thoughts On The Missouri Ruling. Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/26/a-few-more-thoughts-on-the-missouri-ruling/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Reason · collected 2026-09-27 · by Josh Blackman

Quick Summary

A law professor reflects on recent Supreme Court decisions regarding redistricting in Missouri, critiquing the ruling's handling of standing and merits arguments as unsatisfactory. The writer questions why the court did not specify which applicant has standing, suggesting that either the justices disagreed or were indifferent to establishing this clearly. Additionally, they argue that the court’s decision prioritizes avoiding electoral chaos over legal precedent and judicial burden requirements.
Written by AI on 2026-09-27, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

A federal appeals court in Missouri ordered on September 18 that the state must use newly drawn Republican-backed congressional districts for November’s midterm elections, despite previous rulings by both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Missouri Supreme Court blocking their implementation. The new map, favored by former President Donald Trump, aims to benefit Republicans by altering district boundaries and splitting existing ones. This decision follows a long-standing legal battle over redistricting in Missouri, which has seen multiple conflicting court orders affecting voter registration and ballots already printed using the old 2022 map. As a result, the case is likely headed back to the U.S. Supreme Court for a final ruling before November's elections.

Written for “Missouri Redistricting Saga” on 2026-11-01, grounded in this article and the 26 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Missouri Redistricting Saga
Politics · 27 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 5% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Reason
Outlet record 67/100
“Article A discusses reflections on a recent Missouri redistricting case ruling, while Article B appears to be about historical events in Supreme Court history on September 29, 2005.”
Fox News
Hedges 4 of 38 claims Outlet record 69/100
“Article A discusses a specific ruling and timeline for Missouri's redistricting, while Article B reflects on the broader implications of the case without specifying the exact ruling or date.”
ABC News (US)
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 0 of 5 claims Outlet record 70/100
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans right further right than this Hedges 1 of 13 claims Outlet record 70/100
“Article A discusses the Supreme Court's ruling halting an appeals court decision and affirming the use of Missouri's GOP-friendly congressional map, while Article B provides reflections on the ruling with a focus on legal discussion.”
Mother Jones
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 21 claims Outlet record 95/100
New York Post
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 2 of 34 claims Outlet record 66/100
“Article A reports on the Supreme Court's denial of Trump-backed Missouri congressional map, while Article B offers personal reflections and analysis on the ruling but does not describe the same specific court action.”
CBS News
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 3 claims Outlet record 66/100
“Article A reports a specific Supreme Court decision blocking a Missouri congressional map, while Article B provides commentary on the ruling and reflects on its legal implications.”
Reason
⚖️ Leans right further right than this Hedges 2 of 12 claims Outlet record 67/100
“The articles discuss different topics, with Article A focusing on a symposium essay about birthright citizenship and Article B reflecting on a Missouri redistricting case ruling.”
Mother Jones
⚖️ Leans right further right than this Hedges 1 of 41 claims Outlet record 95/100
“The articles discuss different legal issues related to abortion laws and redistricting, not the same specific incident.”
Reason
Outlet record 67/100
“The articles refer to different time periods and contexts, with Article A summarizing historical Supreme Court events on a specific date while Article B discusses reflections on a ruling that occurred after the date mentioned in Article A.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
44
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
5%
2 of 44 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
27
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-27 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 1046 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Josh Blackman
86 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 I thought it might be worthwhile to dig into the numbers a bit more.
🔮 Today the law firm of Weil Gotshal announced that it would wind down.
2026-10-28 · assertive framing · Farewell to Weil
🔮 And her unwillingness to participate in any disciplinary proceedings suggests something is amiss.
🔮 Longtime readers will recall that I took mileage runs to Singapore, Hong Kong, and Sydney to make status at the end of the year.
2026-10-28 · assertive framing · 1,000,000 Miles on United
🔮 Let's hope that people across the media industry will take Josh Blackman's criticism to heart.
2026-10-27 · assertive framing · The Wall Street Journal Praises The Old Gray Lady
🔮 New from Reason: a look into what Javier Milei has accomplished and what it will take to make the most of Argentina’s window for real change.
2026-10-26 · assertive framing · Today in Supreme Court History: October 26, 1774
🔮 ] There have been many news reports suggesting that the United States Department of Justice may pursue denaturalization proceedings against Representative Ilhan Omar.
🔮 Nevertheless, the next two decades would vastly enlarge the president's powers as Congress' authority over the executive branch would be greatly diminished.
🔮 Justice Sotomayor, Justice Gorsuch, Justice Barrett, and Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
🔮 The regulations for Freedmen schools in Texas provided that classes would begin at 9 A.M. and "[t]he morning Exercises will commence with either the singing of an appropriate hymn, or prayer, or the reading of the Scriptures."
Also by Josh Blackman
Farewell to Weil
2026-10-28 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 86 articles by Josh Blackman →

Topics

Court Missouri Purcell The Supreme Court the Eighth Circuit

Subjects

Court ORG · 7× Stras PERSON · 5× the Eighth Circuit ORG · 4× The Supreme Court ORG · 3× Missouri GPE · 2× Purcell PERSON · 2× Jackson PERSON · 1× Richard Von Glahn PERSON · 1× the District Court's ORG · 1× the Eighth Circuit's ORG · 1×

Narrative

Given this Court's two prior orders in this litigation, our conclusion that this was error should come as no surprise.2 Consistent with this Court's September 10 stay order, we therefore must now stay the District Court's new September 21 and September 22 injunctions3 and the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate and September 22 order.4 I have written how some lower court judges have been deliberately obtuse while parsing emergency docket rulings.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-27
🔮 Judge Stras offered some remarks at a pre-scheduled event at William & Mary:
2026-09-27 · Reason
A Few More Thoughts On The Missouri Ruling · assertive framing

Claims (44 extracted, 2 hedged)

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent Friday evening, shortly before I signed off, I was able to dash out a very short post on my phone about the Missouri redistricting case. asserted
I → sign → case
Over the past 25 hours, without the distraction of any screens, I've had some more time to reflect on the ruling. asserted
I → have → ruling
First, I found the Court's discussion of standing in a footnote to be completely unsatisfactory. asserted
discussion → find → footnote
We conclude that at least one of the applicants has standing on appeal. asserted
one → conclude → appeal
What does it mean that "at least one of the applicants has standing." asserted
one → mean → standing
Why doesn't the Court just tell us which of the two applicants have standing? asserted
which → tell → standing
Judge Stras's concurrence in the Eighth Circuit offered a compelling argument why neither party has standing. asserted
party → offer → standing
The Supreme Court can't just assume that one of the parties has standing, without telling us which one. asserted
one → assume → standing
What happened here? asserted
What → happen → ?
I can think of a few possibilities. asserted
I → think → possibilities
Perhaps the Court's conservatives did not agree on which of the two applicants had standing, so they dodged the issue. asserted
they → agree → issue
Or, the majority didn't really care whether any party had standing, so they used this conjectural language. asserted
they → care → language
I lean towards the latter. asserted
I → lean → latter
I think the upshot of Purcell is that when electoral chaos is on the horizon, jurisdiction no longer matters. asserted
jurisdiction → think → horizon
On the merits, the Court's precedents have not previously stated that Article I, Section 2 requires a state to use the primary election map in a general election, and given that the equities heavily favor staying this late-breaking intervention, it suffices that the merits are not entirely clearcut. asserted
merits → state → intervention
The Applicants are entitled to relief if they can make a clear showing that they are likely to succeed on the merits. asserted
they → entitle → merits
Justice Jackson has made this point more times than I can count. asserted
I → make → point
But by the majority's own admission, the applicant don't even come remotely close to satisfying that burden. asserted
applicant → come → burden
Instead, the upshot of Purcell is that when when electoral chaos is on the horizon, the merits no longer matters. asserted
merits → matter → horizon
Third, the Court faults the Eighth Circuit for failing to understand the previous one sentence ruling: asserted
Court → fault → ruling
Given this Court's two prior orders in this litigation, our conclusion that this was error should come as no surprise.2 Consistent with this Court's September 10 stay order, we therefore must now stay the District Court's new September 21 and September 22 injunctions3 and the Eighth Circuit's September 21 mandate and September 22 order.4 I have written how some lower court judges have been deliberately obtuse while parsing emergency docket rulings. asserted
judges → give → rulings
But here, I have some sympathy for the Eighth Circuit. asserted
I → have → Circuit
Judge Stras offered some remarks at a pre-scheduled event at William & Mary: asserted
Stras → offer → William
"They release these short orders that are sometimes really unclear to the circuit courts," said Judge David Stras, an appointee of President Donald Trump who sits on the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. uncertain
who → release → Circuit
Stras spoke Saturday during an event hosted by William & Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Va. Stras defended the court, saying that they're often in a hard position. asserted
they → speak → position
Depending on the case, he said, there are good reasons for writing more or writing less. asserted
he → depend → less
"I don't know where the happy medium is," he said. asserted
he → know → ?
He said it would've been "incredibly helpful" in the Missouri case for the justices to explain what, if anything, was left for the lower courts to decide after the Supreme Court stayed an order directing the state to use a redrawn map favoring the GOP earlier this month. asserted
Court → say → GOP
"It would have been better to have a little bit more, in terms of tell us what to do," Stras said. asserted
Stras → have → what
"What's off limits and what can we look at?" asserted
we → look → what
My understanding of the prior rulings was that the Supreme Court rejected the federal rulings based on the AISG doctrine. asserted
Court → reject → doctrine
The Amars and other praised Justice Kavanaugh for promoting a due respect for federalism. asserted
Amars → praise → federalism
But now the Court tells us that the September 25 order is "consistent" with the earlier orders. asserted
order → tell → orders
Fourth, the Court took some gratuitous shots at the Missouri Secretary of State: asserted
Court → take → State
Moreover, in this case, the Missouri SupremeCourt was not responsible for the late-breaking changes. asserted
SupremeCourt → break → changes
On the contrary, in an opinion back in May 2026, well before the primary election, the Missouri Supreme Court stated that the 2025 map would not take effect until approved by the voters in an intervening referendum, at least if the referendum petition was legally sufficient. uncertain
petition → state → referendum
So in the several-month period before the August primary election, the Missouri Secretary of State was well aware that conducting the August primary election with the 2025 map carried significant risks. asserted
conducting → conduct → risks
The Secretary nonetheless chose to proceed with the 2025 map for the primary. asserted
Secretary → choose → primary
I don't have time to go into all the details, but let's just say this accounting of the facts is disputed by Missouri. asserted
accounting → have → Missouri
But the Court simply accepted one side's statement of the facts. asserted
Court → accept → facts
…and 4 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support