Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins agreed Thursday to use the state's 2022 congressional map, hours after a contentious hearing before the Missouri Supreme Court over whether to hold him in contempt.
In a statement issued Thursday afternoon, Hoskins conceded that the only court order currently in effect is that of the Missouri Supreme Court, which ruled last week that the redrawn 2025 congressional map was not in effect, and never had been in effect, because it is subject to a referendum.
"My Office is directing local election authorities to use the 2022 congressional map," Hoskins said.
Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway also issued a statement Thursday afternoon, saying she supported Hoskins' decision.
"We affirm the Secretary of State of Denny Hoskins' position and decision to advise local election authorities that the 2022 map is in effect," Hanaway said. "We respect and will continue to comply with all court decisions, including orders issued by the Supreme Court of Missouri. We appreciate Secretary Hoskins's continued commitment to upholding the law and working diligently to fulfill his duties on behalf of Missouri."
Hoskins' announcement came during a whirlwind day that began with the U.S. Supreme Court effectively blocking the use of the 2025 congressional map by issuing a stay of a federal judge's order.
Hoskins said because of that stay, he will order local court clerks to use the 2022 congressional map.
Contempt hearing
Hoskins still faces possible punishment for his previous actions, as the Missouri Supreme Court considers whether or not to hold him in contempt of court.
On Thursday morning, multiple Missouri Supreme Court judges pressed Hoskins' attorney on whether Hoskins would follow the court's ruling that invalidated the 2025 congressional redistricting map.
The court did not issue an immediate ruling on whether to hold Hoskins in contempt, and is scheduled to reconvene on the matter at 2 p.m. Thursday.
Speaking to the state Supreme Court on Thursday, William Seidleck of the attorney general's office said Hoskins acknowledged that the court's injunction is in effect and is "evaluating next steps."
"Options are being carefully evaluated, of course, with respect to the appeals before the Eighth Circuit," Seidleck said.
That answer appeared to be not good enough for several members of the court.
Chief Justice W. Brent Powell said he wanted to hear Seidleck say that the 2025 map, also known as HB 1, never went into effect, as the Missouri Supreme Court had previously ruled.
"I want to make sure that the attorney general and the secretary of state understand that there is nothing that would prevent that holding from being in effect. That HB 1 never went into effect," Powell said.
Seidleck said that was the case under state law.
Powell also voiced concern about possible future actions involving the 2025 map, noting the state has already held one election, the August primary, with a map that no longer exists under the Missouri Supreme Court's ruling.
"Is it the Secretary of State and your client's intention, if he's successful on appeal, to conduct a second election with that map?" Powell said.
Seidleck answered that there are multiple moving parts in that scenario.
"If a federal court were to issue a new order that was ultimately allowed to go into effect, then the secretary would have to comply with the federal court order," Seidleck said.
The effect that other court decisions could have on the Missouri Supreme Court's ruling was another point of contention during the hearing.
Multiple judges said future rulings from federal courts would not change the Missouri Supreme Court's ruling that the 2025 map never went into effect.
Judge Paul Wilson said he was less than comfortable with the answer that Hoskins was evaluating options going forward.
"What else is there to be considered other than the fact that our injunction, which has never not been in effect, is still fully in effect?" Wilson said.
Seidleck told the court that Hoskins was "between a rock and a hard place with the TRO as well as the state ballot deadline" when he made his decision to go with the 2025 map.
"But because he chose a door, he risked being held in contempt in one of the courts. He picked door No. 1 or door No. 2. He could have just waited until we just got a ruling from the United States Supreme Court," Powell said.
Speaking after Seidleck's arguments, attorney Chuck Hatfield told the court that the answer of "evaluating next steps" isn't sufficient from the secretary of state.
"I thought we were all going to agree to be adults here today, and do what the law required," Hatfield said.
Hatfield told the court it needs to circumvent Hoskins when it comes to the upcoming election.
"I recommend that you tell the local election authorities today that they are to follow your orders, that they are to use what is the law in the state in Chapter 128. They are not to use House Bill 1," Hatfield said.
Before adjourning, Powell told Hoskins to "not venture far from Jefferson City" until the contempt motion is resolved.
Copyright 2026 St. Louis Public Radio