Missouri Supreme Court sides with Kehoe in lawsuit over legality of 2025 special session that led to ‘Missouri First’ congressional map

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (KMIZ)

The Missouri Supreme sided with Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe on Wednesday in a case determining the legality of a special session that was held last year that led to the creation of a new state Congressional map.

The NAACP presented arguments against Kehoe, challenging his authority to call for last year's special session to redraw Missouri's congressional map. Attorney representing the group, Sharon Geuea Jones, argued the governor can only call an extraordinary session for emergencies, like following severe weather or in the event legislators don't pass the state's budget.

The state’s high court determined the governor was within his right to call the special session.

Assistant Solicitor General Joseph Kiernan argued the law authorizes Kehoe to call an extraordinary session anytime outside of the regular session.

"They [the plaintiffs] take these two words 'extraordinary' and 'occasion,' they cherry-pick modern dictionary definitions of each word, and they offer a multifactor three-part test the governor must meet to exercise his own article four power," Kiernan said.

He went on to say that the subsection of the law he mentioned shows no indication of any requirements that Kehoe must meet to call an extraordinary session.

"If the framers of our state constitution wanted to constrain the governor, they would have said so," Kiernan said.

The lawsuit challenges that the governor's proclamation did not meet the legal requirements to justify an extraordinary legislative session. In February, a Cole County judge ruled that Kehoe did act within his legal authority to call for a special session.

If the Supreme Court justices rule in the NAACP's favor, then it will overturn both the 2025 congressional map and initiative petition reform. If not, voters are expected to vote in their new congressional districts and approve or deny the initiative petition reform.

Kiernan argues the NAACP is pressing politics, not the law.

"They are asking this court, as a judicial branch at large, to supervise an inherently political decision made by the governor," Kiernan said.

Geuea Jones argues that the court is being asked to interpret the governor's constitutional authority to call an extraordinary session.

"It is not a political question; this is very clearly a matter of constitutional verification," she said. "We are not asking this court to make a policy determination about what the general assembly considered in its extraordinary session."

To close arguments, Kiernan added it's too close to the fall elections for these changes to be made ahead of the 2026 elections, and any changes would have to occur afterward.

"Missouri's recognized equitable principles support delayed relief, reducing chaos surrounding the quickly approaching upcoming election," the state argues in a court briefing.

Geuea Jones said there's still plenty of time to work with the overturned policies.

"Ballots aren't printed until June 9," she said. "So if the court rules as they have done on these other cases, very quickly, there's still plenty of time for the [county] clerks to adjust their rolls and get their ballots printed before the election."

Wednesday's appeal of the judge's decision questions whether challengers had the legal ability to sue because the session had ended and whether the lawsuit is moot or capable of being repeated but evades review.

Keirnan argued the lawsuit is moot because the session has ended and the map passed.