Jefferson City, Mo. — Five Missouri voters filed a proposed class-action lawsuit Friday in Cole County Circuit Court asking a judge to hold Secretary of State Denny Hoskins financially responsible for what they say was his failure to perform statutorily required duties related to a referendum challenging the state’s 2025 congressional map.
What the suit alleges
The plaintiffs contend Hoskins improperly refused to certify a voter referendum on the map after local election authorities verified signatures, and later directed local officials to use the 2025 districts even after the Missouri Supreme Court ordered the referendum onto the November ballot and instructed that the older districts remain in effect for this election.
The complaint invokes a Missouri statute dating to 1945 that requires the secretary of state to pay between $100 and $500 to any aggrieved person when the officeholder "neglect[s] or refuse[s] to perform any of the duties enjoined on him by law." The plaintiffs request the maximum amount under that law — $500 per member of the proposed class — which they say would total about $80 million.
Scope of the proposed class
The filing asks a judge to allow the five plaintiffs to represent roughly 162,000 registered Missouri voters whose petition signatures were verified by local election officials. The petition drive originally produced more than 330,000 submitted signatures in an effort to force a statewide referendum on the contested map.
| Item | Number |
|---|---|
| Submitted signatures | 330,000+ |
| Verified voters in proposed class | 162,000 |
| Requested payment per person | $500 |
| Potential judgment | ~$80 million |
Legal timeline and contentious orders
The dispute stems from congressional districts enacted in 2025 during a special legislative session. Secretary Hoskins declared the petition insufficient, not because it lacked the necessary valid signatures, but because he concluded the redistricting decision was not subject to the referendum process.
Earlier this month, the Missouri Supreme Court unanimously rejected that position, finding the petition to be "legal, sufficient and timely," and ordered the referendum placed on the November ballot. The court also directed that the congressional districts adopted in 2022 be used for this year's general election while the referendum proceeded.
According to the lawsuit, Hoskins later directed local election officials to implement the 2025 map despite the state high court's order. The complaint also takes aim at Hoskins' role in a subsequent federal court action that briefly produced a conflicting order directing the use of the 2025 districts, asserting he improperly consented to that federal order in a way that violated state law on public officials' authority.
Relief sought and statutory basis
The plaintiffs invoke the postwar-era statute requiring payment of between $100 and $500 to anyone harmed when the secretary of state neglects or refuses to perform duties imposed by law. By seeking the maximum $500 per affected voter for roughly 162,000 people, the suit arrives at approximately $80 million in potential damages.
- It requests class certification so the five named plaintiffs can represent the roughly 162,000 verified voters.
- It asks the court to hold the secretary of state accountable under the 1945 statute for alleged failures to carry out legal duties.
- The filing challenges both the refusal to certify the referendum and the instruction to use the 2025 districts after the Missouri Supreme Court's order.
Implications for Missouri's election administration
A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would be consequential for the state office, potentially exposing the office to substantial monetary liability and setting a precedent for enforcement of duties under the nearly 80-year-old statute. The case also underscores continuing conflicts between state and federal court actions, and the political and legal push-and-pull over how redistricting disputes are resolved ahead of an election year.
The lawsuit was filed in Cole County Circuit Court. The complaint and related filings will determine the next procedural steps, including whether a judge will certify the proposed class and schedule hearings on the merits of the allegations.
As of the filing, the lawsuit names the five voters as plaintiffs and targets Secretary Hoskins for the alleged statutory violations; the secretary’s office had not filed a public response in the court docket at the time of the filing reviewed for this report.
Further developments — including any response from the secretary of state's office, motions over class certification and court scheduling — will shape whether this challenge advances to a full trial or is resolved through other legal mechanisms.
Gabriela Montez is the state correspondent for WE NEWS.
