Supreme Court Addresses Missouri Redistricting, Mail-In Voting Disputes

Why it matters locally: Wisconsin residents may be affected by the Supreme Court's decisions on mail-in voting requirements, as these rulings could influence future state election procedures and access to voting.

---

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court intervened Thursday to prevent Missouri from enacting a new congressional map for upcoming elections. The court granted a request to halt the map's implementation while litigation proceeds. Organizers of a referendum on the new map sought the delay. Separately, the court denied a request for a stay of execution from Daniel Conahan, Jr. on Thursday. Florida executed Conahan hours later for the 1996 murder of Richard Allen Montgomery. On Tuesday, the Trump administration filed a petition asking the court to review the process used to appoint acting U.S. attorneys. The administration argued a U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruling could cause confusion in five U.S. Attorney’s Offices within that circuit, which collectively manage over 8,000 cases annually. The Trump administration also appealed a dispute over President Donald Trump’s executive order on mail-in voting to the Supreme Court on Sunday. States and civic groups challenging the order filed their responses to the appeal Wednesday. The court may issue a decision on this matter at any time. Additionally, the administration asked the Supreme Court to allow the use of the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database to identify noncitizens on state voter rolls. A response to this request is due next Tuesday. In related developments, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit declined Thursday to allow the Trump administration to implement a new U.S. Postal Service rule tightening mail-in voting requirements before the November elections. Reuters reported the 1st Circuit found no error in a district court's conclusion that the rule would likely disenfranchise voters. The administration had already appealed to the Supreme Court before the 1st Circuit issued its decision. Another appeals court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, rejected an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy regarding the detention of noncitizens without bond. Politico reported the court cited the policy's resemblance to historical Japanese internment. This marks the ninth consecutive loss for ICE on this policy in federal appeals courts, which have consistently ruled the administration's approach misinterprets a 1996 immigration reform law. The Supreme Court is expected to address this issue in its next term. Public opinion on the Supreme Court shows 31% of Americans approve of its job performance, while 53% disapprove, according to a recent Economist/YouGov survey. The survey indicated a partisan gap, with 63% of Republicans approving compared to 12% of Democrats. Researchers also found 40% of Americans believe the court is biased in favor of President Trump, 11% believe it is biased against him, and 24% believe it treats him fairly. A dispute regarding Ten Commandments displays in public school classrooms may come before the Supreme Court during the 2026-27 term. Adam Liptak, in The New York Times, discussed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision to uphold a Texas law allowing Ten Commandments displays, a ruling that appeared to diverge from the Supreme Court’s 1980 decision in *Stone v. Graham*. In a separate event, Justice Brett Kavanaugh will speak at a Notre Dame event commemorating the 25th anniversary of 9/11. Kavanaugh, who served as a White House attorney in 2001, has described 9/11 as "the most memorable, searing, important day" of his life. The event is scheduled for 3:30 p.m. EDT and will be livestreamed. Catholic University Law School will host an event on September 18 focused on the Supreme Court's current status and what to anticipate in the upcoming term. Speakers will include Amy Howe and Sarah Isgur. **Historical Note: Justice Gabriel Duvall** Justice Gabriel Duvall, who served on the Supreme Court from 1811 to 1835, is often cited in discussions comparing justices based on their perceived impact. Duvall, born in 1752, had a career that included serving in the Maryland State Convention during the American Revolution and representing enslaved Marylanders seeking freedom, despite owning enslaved people himself. He resigned from the Executive Council of Maryland in 1786 due to objections about a law expanding the governor’s powers. Duvall was elected to the U.S. House in 1794, where he met James Madison. He resigned in 1796 to become chief judge of the General Court of Maryland. Thomas Jefferson appointed him comptroller of the treasury in 1802. Madison nominated Duvall to the Supreme Court in 1811. During his 25 years on the court, Duvall issued few separate opinions, a characteristic of the era. He generally aligned with Chief Justice John Marshall. His most notable work included dissents in slavery cases, such as *Mima Queen and Child v. Hepburn*, where he argued for the primacy of freedom claims over typical evidence rules. In *Le Grand v. Darnall*, Duvall wrote a unanimous opinion that a slave owner’s bequest of property to an enslaved person implied freedom. Duvall retired from the court in 1835 due to deafness, becoming the first justice to voluntarily retire after a long career. He died in 1844 at age 91.