Does the U.S. Constitution require Missouri to use a 2025 redistricting map in the 2026 congressional election despite state law requiring voter approval via referendum? Specifically, should federal court orders requiring the use of the 2025 map be stayed given the proximity to the election? The Court must determine if the "Purcell principle" against last-minute changes to election rules applies to this dispute.

• The 2022 map should be used because the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in *von Glahn v. Hoskins* that the 2025 map is not law until approved by referendum.
• Federal courts should not "alter the election rules" of a state on the eve of an election, as doing so creates electoral chaos.
• The 2026 election has already begun, with ballots printed and absentee voting underway using the 2022 map.
• The Missouri Secretary of State was aware of the legal risks regarding the 2025 map since May 2026 and chose to proceed with it for primaries regardless.

• The U.S. Constitution requires Missouri to use the 2025 redistricting map in the 2026 election.
• The Missouri Supreme Court’s decision prohibiting the 2025 map was a "last-minute decision" that destabilized the election process.
• This state court intervention could potentially decide the outcome of party control of Congress.
• Not stated.

• The Court granted the application for stay, staying the Eighth Circuit's mandate and order as well as the District Court's injunctions requiring the use of the 2025 map.
• The Court applied traditional stay factors under *Nken v. Holder*, noting that a stay is appropriate when equities favor it and the merits are not "entirely clearcut," citing *Rodriguez v. Popular Democratic Party*.
• On the merits, the Court found no precedent stating that Article I, Section 2 requires a state to use a primary election map in a general election.
• The Court invoked the "Purcell principle," which cautions that lower federal courts should not "alter the election rules" of a state "on the eve of an election," citing *Purcell v. Gonzalez*, *Allen v. Milligan*, and *Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee*.
• The Court observed that because ballots have been printed and absentee, military, and overseas voting has begun under the 2022 map, reverting to the 2025 map would "usher in electoral chaos."
• The Court rejected the Eighth Circuit's reasoning that the Missouri Supreme Court caused the instability, noting state court warnings since May 2026 in *Maggard v. State*, *Healey v. State*, and *NAACP Mo. State Conference v. Kehoe*.
• The Court emphasized that while federal courts avoid last-minute changes, "States are free to decide for themselves whether last-minute changes to an election are in their best interests," per *Allen v. Milligan*.
• The Court concluded that the District Court and Court of Appeals should not enjoin the use of the 2022 map or require the use of the 2025 map for the 2026 congressional election.