Marina
A legal battle has erupted in Missouri over the validity of petition signatures for a new redistricting referendum aimed at overturning the state’s recently passed congressional map.
While Secretary of State Denny Hoskins has cleared the measure for circulation, his insistence that no signatures collected beforehand count has ignited sharp debate over whether the petition drive is lawful or a political power play.
The referendum backers, organized under People Not Politicians, assert over 100,000 signatures already gathered are legitimate — setting the stage for a clash over constitutional interpretation, statutory text, and democratic rights.
What’s the Legal Controversy?
Hoskins’s approval allows the referendum to begin gathering signatures from registered Missouri voters but with a stern caveat: any signatures collected before formal approval are invalid, and collecting them is a misdemeanor election offense under Missouri law.
By contrast, the petition’s backers argue that the Missouri Constitution only mandates submitting a cover sheet before circulating a petition—not waiting for formal approval. They maintain the law does not explicitly forbid gathering signatures between submission and approval.
A law professor at UMKC, Allen Rostron, captures the tension:
“If you’re going with the letter of the law, the referendum group has a good argument. But if you say what was the purpose of this law, the Secretary of State has a pretty good case.”
In his approval letter, Hoskins’s office cites the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling in No Bans on Choice v. Ashcroft, emphasizing that even after circulation, the Secretary must later examine the petition for constitutional and statutory compliance.
If deficiencies emerge — such as defective signatures, improper timing, or failure to meet thresholds — the petition can be rejected or disqualified, though ultimately subject to judicial review.
Key Figures, Deadlines & Requirements
| Item | Detail / Figure |
|---|---|
| Petition ID | 2026-R004 |
| Minimum signatures required | 5% of registered voters in 6 of 8 congressional districts |
| Deadline for signatures | Mid-December 2025 (statutory cut-off) |
| Signatures already claimed | Over 100,000 gathered (according to petitioners) |
| Hoskins’ position | Rejects all pre-approval signatures as invalid |
| Opponents’ position | Such signatures should count, under “submission before approval” interpretation |
| Legal risk | Collecting before approval may constitute a misdemeanor election offense, per state law |
Arguments on Both Sides
1. Hoskins & Secretary’s Office
- Emphasize the strict statutory reading: Missouri law deems signatures collected before formal approval invalid.
- Argue that allowing early gathering would undermine the integrity of the process and enable confusion campaigns or external interference.
- Rely on the Constitution and §§ of state statutes (e.g. § 116.120.1, RSMo) to enforce timing rules.
2. People Not Politicians & Legal Scholars
- Maintain the plain text of statute § 116.332 permits collection once a petition is submitted to the Secretary of State. Approval is not explicitly required first.
- Assert that the spirit of direct democracy under Missouri’s constitution guarantees that procedural delays shouldn’t block citizen referendums.
- Claim that Hoskins’s interpretation is politically motivated, intended to suppress the referendum by invalidating large chunks of collected signatures.
- Point to historic precedent: referendums have previously challenged redistricting maps in Missouri (e.g. 1922).
Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway has also plunged in, filing a federal lawsuit arguing the referendum itself may be unconstitutional and outside the public’s authority — raising the stakes further.
Timing, Strategy & Risks Moving Forward
- Backers must gather valid signatures from at least 6 congressional districts, achieving a threshold figure that likely exceeds 100,000 valid signatures after verification.
- If many signatures are invalidated due to timing claims, the group may face shortfall risk, undermining their ballot placement.
- Legal challenges loom: any disqualification by Hoskins can be contested in court, especially given competing interpretations of statute and constitutional rights.
- Public messaging will be critical — the debate over “interpretation vs. purpose” could sway courts, media, and public opinion.
The controversy around the Missouri redistricting referendum is not just about lines on a map — it’s about who defines democracy and how rules are enforced. The battle over whether pre-approval signatures count may determine whether the referendum lives or dies.
Secretary Hoskins defends a strict process; petitioner backers assert that constitutional principles of citizen initiative demand more leeway.
As the petition drive presses on, courts will almost certainly decide which reading prevails — and in doing so, shape the boundaries of citizen power versus institutional control in Missouri.