After losing in two courts and winning in another, Missouri officials said they planned to forge ahead with using a congressional map that was redrawn to benefit Republicans.
Page A2From§Eachthe midnight edition — 9 September 2026
Missouri congressional map loses in two courts, wins in a third, ships anyway
As it ran on the front
You're smart. I don't say that to soften you up for something — I say it because you already know how to read a box score, and that's really all I'm asking of you today. A smart operation, and I mean the kind that runs an entire state, does not make the mistake that's sitting on page nine of this morning's paper. So let's look at the mistake, and you tell me what you'd have done differently.
I wrote this down, hang on — here it is. September 4th. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled on the state's new congressional map, the one redrawn to help one party in November. The ruling was unanimous. Not split. Not close. The map, the court said, does not go into effect.…
…(cont) That's one ruling against the map.
The same day — I've got the quote here too — the president said the Missouri Supreme Court "ridiculously ruled" in blocking it. Not "the federal judge got this one right." Not "let's see how the other courts come down." He picked a side before the other courts had spoken at all.
Five days later, they spoke. A Supreme Court justice and a federal judge, according to the Washington Post, issued opposite decisions on the same map, hours apart. The Supreme Court side declined to save it. The federal judge upheld it.
So this is what's sitting in front of Missouri's election officials this week: one ruling against the map from the state's highest court, one non-rescue from the U.S. Supreme Court, and one federal judge willing to let it run. Two courts didn't save it. One did. And the map going into November's House races is the one from the court that did.
Now, I've got a car that needs a fan belt — has for about a month, I keep meaning to get to it — and if I took it to two mechanics who told me the transmission's going, and a third guy who works out of his garage on weekends told me it's fine, I wouldn't drive off waving the third guy's estimate at anybody who asked. Not because the third guy's wrong. Maybe he's not. But would you hand a stranger the one paper out of three that tells the story you wanted to hear, and call that the paperwork?
Would a smart operation — and I already told you I think this one is — run this November's House races on a map that most of its own courts rejected?
Would it help or hurt that operation if the president had already called one of those two courts illegitimate, on the record, before the other court had even ruled?
I don't have an opinion on any of that. I've just got the dates.
Oh — one more thing, before you go. The map running Missouri's congressional races this November — is that the map the state's highest court unanimously blocked on September 4th? Or is it the map a federal judge upheld five days later, after the Supreme Court declined to step in?
I already read you both rulings. The map on Missouri's ballot this November is the one from the court that upheld it — not the one from the court that blocked it.
“They lost twice and are calling that a mandate. This is what "let the courts decide" means to these guys — you keep filing until one judge says yes, then you stop counting the other two. The seats in that state get drawn by the answer they wanted, not the one they got.”
“Look, one federal judge upheld the map — that's a real ruling, that counts just as much as the... okay, it's one judge versus two courts, but the point is the map is legally in effect right now, and that's what matters, that it's — did I just say legally? I meant politically. Let's move on.”
The receipts
Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and a federal judge issued opposite decisions on the fate of a congressional map that favored the GOP, leaving races in limbo.
· Trump: Missouri Supreme Court 'ridiculously ruled in favor' of blocking redistricting plan from the morgue, 4 Sep 2026
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front.