Missouri Voters Seek Damages Over Redistricting Referendum Handling

Five Missouri voters are demanding around $80 million from Secretary of State Denny Hoskins. They cite his management of a congressional redistricting referendum. They are using a little-known state law dating back to 1909. The class action proposes seeking the statutory maximum of $500 for each of the approximately 162,000 verified petition signers. The case has yet to be certified as a class action. The court has neither ruled Hoskins liable nor awarded any damages.

The lawsuit, Bermudez et al. v. Hoskins, No. 26AC-CC00591, was filed on September 11 in Cole County Circuit Court. It focuses on Section 28.200 of the Missouri Revised Statutes. This provision allows a person “aggrieved” by a neglectful secretary of state to initiate a civil action. Hoskins, elected Missouri’s 41st secretary of state in 2024, served previously in both the Missouri Senate and House of Representatives.

What Does the Lawsuit Allege?

The suit arises from a dispute over Missouri’s congressional map, linked to House Bill 1 (HB1) in 2025. As per Newsweek, the contentious issue is whether Missouri should utilize its 2022 map or the Republican-backed map of 2025. The new map might enable Republicans to secure seven of Missouri’s eight House seats, up from six. The Missouri Supreme Court disallowed the 2025 map, but a federal judge mandated its use. Justice Brett Kavanaugh blocked a request to support the 2025 map, with the full U.S. Supreme Court suspending the federal judge’s order pending appeal.

The lawsuit claims Hoskins didn’t challenge the referendum petition’s validity, despite declaring it insufficient. It accuses him of instructing election officials to adopt the HB1 map, contrary to the Missouri Supreme Court’s 2022 directive. It further alleges Hoskins consented to a federal restraining order deemed an effort to bypass the state Supreme Court’s decision. These allegations are yet to be proven in the damages case. This dispute is part of a larger legal battle over Missouri’s congressional map for the 2026 elections.

Who Would Be Included?

The proposed class affects Missouri voters with verified referendum signatures and state citizenship at the petition’s filing, as per the complaint. Potential class members’ identities are found in the referendum petitions. The class is not yet certified, awaiting court decision on representing the larger group before considering classwide recovery.

Hoskins Defends His Position

Hoskins responded on X, committing to comply with a federal restraining order from Judge Clark on congressional elections. “I will continue to abide by Judge Clark’s federal temporary restraining order on a federal congressional election,” he wrote. He also criticized his adversaries, vowing to safeguard “Missouri values” and avoid governance “like the communists running NYC.” He later posted a picture on X of himself holding a drink captioned, “God bless the Show-Me State.”

What Does the Statute Say?

Section 28.200 states if the secretary neglects legal duties, they owe “the person aggrieved” $100 to $500. This has historic roots, with versions dating back to 1909. The current provision took effect on August 28, 1945. The statute is pivotal to the lawsuit, with plaintiffs arguing Hoskins neglected duties linked to Missouri’s map referendum.

The statute doesn’t automatically entitle the plaintiffs to $500 each, as it’s the maximum under the law.

How Does the Lawsuit Reach $80 Million?

The proposed class includes Missouri voters with verified signatures in the People Not Politicians petition, citizens when filed, as stated in the lawsuit. Approximately 162,000 people may fit the class. The potential recovery could hit about $80 million if each gets the statutory maximum. This amount is the lawsuit’s request, not a fine or judgment.

What Must Happen Next?

The court must first address the proposed class and the statutory claim. Questions include whether Section 28.200 allows the classwide recovery sought. The court might also determine each proposed class member’s status as “aggrieved” under the statute, and evaluate Hoskins’ defenses. Responsibility for any judgment payment, if plaintiffs win, remains unclear.

For further comments on this story, contact Newsweek editors Daniel Orton and Robert Greenall.