The Downballot will be taking a short break for Labor Day weekend. We’ll be back in your inbox with a special report on Tuesday, and the Morning Digest will return on Wednesday. Have a great holiday!
Leading Off
MO Ballot, MO Redistricting
Democracy advocates won two major legal victories on Thursday evening when the Missouri Supreme Court reinstated a pair of ballot measures for the November midterms, one seeking to repeal the state’s new congressional map and the other aimed at cracking down on the legislature’s ability to interfere with direct democracy.
In the redistricting case, the court unanimously ruled that Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins was not empowered to reject the referendum, which was filed by a group called People Not Politicians.
Last month, Hoskins refused to certify the measure, saying that the state constitution “does not authorize a referendum on congressional redistricting passed by the Missouri General Assembly.”
The justices, however, sharply disagreed. In a 14-page opinion, they concluded that “the plain language” of the constitution “authorizes a referendum as to ‘any act of the general assembly’ and no exception applies.” The effort to place the repeal on the ballot was therefore “legal, sufficient, and timely.”
Because a law targeted by a referendum is retroactively suspended until a vote can be held once the measure is certified, the court further ordered that the state’s new Republican-drawn gerrymander not be used in November.
Instead, it said that the district adopted by lawmakers in 2022 “remain in full force and effect for the November 2026 general election.” The new map would only come into effect if a majority of voters approve it in the referendum vote.
State Attorney General Catherine Hanaway immediately said she would appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If the ruling stands, though, its most dramatic impact will be felt in the 5th Congressional District, a Democratic bastion based in Kansas City that was the GOP’s chief target. Republicans had sought to oust longtime Rep. Emanuel Cleaver by carving up the city and dividing it between three districts.
The revamped 5th would have stretched almost from the state border with Kansas deep into rural central Missouri some 200 miles away, ensuring that it would have voted for Donald Trump by a wide 58-40 margin.
Now, though, it’s been restored to its previous configuration, a compact district that instead supported Kamala Harris 61-38. (We’ve updated our database of presidential election results by congressional district to reflect the new ruling.)
Cleaver had forged ahead with his campaign for reelection despite the new gerrymander, but now he’ll be the heavy favorite to win a 12th term.
Thursday’s ruling could also be felt in the 2nd District, a Republican-held seat in the St. Louis suburbs and exurbs that the GOP sought to make somewhat redder to shore up Rep. Ann Wagner.
The new map would have given Trump a 55-43 win in the 2nd, but that will now drop back to 53-45. Wagner faces a challenge from Democrat Fred Wellman, an Army veteran and podcast host.
The court did not say, however, how election officials should handle the fact that primaries were held last month under the now-suspended map, though officials have several options.
Under one scenario, the state could simply allow nominees to keep running in the district with the same number, even though different lines were used in the primary. State law also allows parties to pick new nominees in the event of vacancies, though it’s not clear whether the relevant deadlines have passed.
Another option would be to hold new primaries on Nov. 3, with a general election to follow. Still another possibility would be to switch to an all-party election in November, with a runoff if no one wins a majority. This approach was used in Texas in 2006 when the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated part of the state’s congressional map after the primary but before the general election.
While Republicans could potentially try to pass another gerrymander next year even if voters shoot down their most recent plan in November, the Missouri Supreme Court’s restoration of the proposed amendment to prohibit legislative tampering with citizen-sponsored initiatives could render that impossible.
Hoskins likewise rejected that measure, which is sponsored by a group called Respect Missouri Voters, saying at a press conference that it violated the state constitution’s prohibition on amendments that address more than a single subject.
The problem, though, was that he didn’t say so in a legally required document explaining his reasons called a certificate of insufficiency. In another unanimous opinion, the state Supreme Court upbraided Hoskins for his failure.
“Because his certificate fails to identify any reason the petition is insufficient under the Missouri Constitution, it does not comply with section 116.150.2 and preserves nothing for this Court’s review,” the justices wrote, referring to the statute in question.
The court, though, nonetheless addressed Hoskins’ “unpreserved” arguments about the single-subject requirement, saying they “lack merit.” The amendment’s provisions all “relate to the single overarching subject of ‘protecting Missouri citizens’ constitutionally reserved lawmaking power,’” the court said.
Those provisions would amend the state constitution to make the ability to bring initiatives and referendums a “fundamental right” and bar lawmakers from weakening either of these powers.
It would further prevent the legislature from repealing or modifying laws passed by initiative—and, crucially for the purposes of redistricting, repassing laws rejected via referendum—unless a four-fifths supermajority in both chambers agrees.
In addition, it would enshrine the current requirements for the signatures necessary to place a measure on the ballot and would also affirm that only a simple statewide majority is required to approve an initiative or referendum. Lastly, it would allow the courts to rewrite misleading summary statements drafted by elected officials.
Election Night
New Hampshire holds its primaries on Tuesday, with contests for the U.S. Senate and the 1st Congressional District sharing center stage on one of the final primary nights of 2026. Below, we preview both contests.
NH-Sen (D & R) (51-48 Harris)
Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas and former Republican Sen. John Sununu are favored to win their respective primaries for the Granite State’s open Senate seat, but they still need to dispatch stubborn intraparty opponents.
Pappas, who has the support of retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and other prominent Democrats, spent most of the campaign with seemingly little to fear from Karishma Manzur, a biochemist and member of the Democratic Socialists of America.
A late August poll from the University of New Hampshire, however, showed Pappas with just a 47-34 edge over his underfunded opponent. The congressman’s team quickly responded by releasing an internal poll from GQR showing him with a huge 71-15 advantage over Manzur.
Sununu, who is running for office for the first time since he lost this same seat to Shaheen in 2008, has the support of Donald Trump and powerful GOP groups like the National Republican Senatorial Committee for his comeback.
His opponent is former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, who moved north after his 2012 loss to Elizabeth Warren only to lose to Shaheen in 2014. Every publicly available poll, though, shows Sununu easily defeating Brown.
NH-01 (D & R) (51-49 Harris)
Eight Democrats are on the ballot for the eastern New Hampshire constituency Pappas is leaving behind, but most of the attention has focused on the expensive battle between two of them.
Former Portsmouth City Councilor Stefany Shaheen, the daughter of Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, posted wide leads in every survey through June. But Marine veteran Maura Sullivan, who lost the 2018 primary to Pappas, picked up support in the final months of the campaign. A trio of recent surveys shows Sullivan leading Shaheen by between 2 to 6 percentage points.
Carleigh Beriont, a member of the town council in Hampton and lecturer at Harvard University, is hoping to take advantage of the rumble between Shaheen and Sullivan by positioning herself as a progressive alternative to the two frontrunners. She got a boost late in the campaign when state Rep. Heath Howard dropped out and endorsed Beriont.
Attorney Christian Urrutia has also raised a notable sum, but he’s struggled to generate media attention or support in the polls. Three underfunded candidates round out the field.
Republicans have a smaller field of four to sort through, though two candidates have likewise seized most of the attention.
Wealthy developer Anthony DiLorenzo has Trump’s endorsement, and he’s spent considerably more than his rivals. But businesswoman Hollie Noveletsky, who took a close second place in the 2024 primary to face Pappas, is hoping for a different result this time. State Rep. Brian Cole and a little-known contender named Lindsey Anderson round out the race.
A pair of recent polls disagree on whether DiLorenzo or Noveletsky has the advantage going into Tuesday. Saint Anselm College placed DiLorenzo ahead 30-17, while UNH gave Noveletsky a narrow 28-25 lead.
Next week’s elections will mark the last time that New Hampshire, long known for its first-in-the-nation presidential primaries, holds nomination contests for congressional and state-level office near the end of the election cycle. A new law moves them to the second Tuesday in June starting in 2028, a time when many other states go to the polls.
But while New Hampshire remains almost last for the 2026 primary season, it’s not quite the closing act. Rhode Island will vote just one day later on Wednesday, a day state leaders picked to avoid going to the polls immediately after Labor Day. Delaware, finally, holds the last primary of the year on Sept. 15.
Redistricting Roundup
MD Redistricting
Maryland’s Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that a Democratic-backed amendment to make it easier for lawmakers to redraw the state’s congressional map can go before voters in November, overturning a pair of lower courts that had blocked the proposal.
In a 5-2 decision, however, the court concluded that a portion of the language that was set to appear on ballots was “misleading” and ordered that different wording take its place.
The amendment clarifies that the state constitution’s criteria for drawing electoral districts, which include compactness, contiguity, and regard for “natural boundaries and the boundaries of political subdivisions,” apply only to maps for the legislature and not for Congress.
It further specifies that no part of the constitution “provides applicable criteria for the boundaries of a congressional districting plan.” In 2022, a state judge struck down a Democratic-drawn map on the grounds that it violated the state constitution as a partisan gerrymander. If voters approve the new amendment, such a ruling would no longer be possible.
That would give Democrats free rein to pass a new map targeting the 1st Congressional District, the only Republican-held seat in the state.
Judges
NC Supreme Court
Democrats got a potential boost in their multi-year quest to retake North Carolina’s Supreme Court on Thursday when Republican Justice Phil Berger Jr. announced he wouldn’t seek reelection in 2028. However, it’s still possible he could instead seek a more powerful spot on the state’s highest court.
Berger, who is part of the body’s 5-2 Republican majority, made his announcement two months before the closely watched race between Democratic Justice Anita Earls and Republican Sarah Stevens, a former state representative.
While the contest between Earls and Stevens, who badly trails the incumbent in fundraising, won’t change the balance of power, it’s still a key step in the Democrats’ drive to flip the body two years from now.
If Earls secures a new eight-year term this fall, her party would next need to win races for two of the three GOP-held seats that will be on the ballot in 2028. A Stevens victory, conversely, would require Democrats to sweep all of them.
Either outcome would have placed Berger, the son and namesake of state Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger, at the center of a heated race during the next presidential election.
And he may still be. While Berger revealed Thursday that he won’t seek another term as an associate justice, his statement included the line, “As for what comes next, I am giving serious thought to other ways I might serve the people of this state.”
Berger declined to reveal more, but the conservative site Carolina Journal suggested he could run for chief justice next cycle. That position, which is directly elected by voters, is currently held by Republican Paul Newby, who won a tight race in 2020 on the same night Berger was elected to replace him as an associate justice.
It remains to be seen, though, what Newby, who will be 73 in 2028, will do. While the state requires judges to retire at age 76, the law still allows Newby to seek a partial term and serve through the end of May of 2031.
Should Newby decide against running again, however, plenty of Republicans are sure to eye his office. And they may not be inclined to defer to Berger, whose powerful father narrowly lost his March primary to remain in the legislature.
If Berger does run for chief justice, though, he’d be following the path Newby himself took just a few years ago on his way to becoming one of the most influential politicians in the Tar Heel State.
Newby, who was elected associate justice in 2004, was the only Republican on the seven-member body in 2020 when he opted to give up his seat to challenge Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, a Democrat. That same year, Berger ran to succeed Newby, while Republican Tamara Barringer campaigned against Democratic Justice Mark Davis.
All three Republicans narrowly prevailed in their respective statewide races, with Newby winning by just 401 votes—a margin of 50.004 to 49.996. Berger and Barringer both won 51-49.
Democrats still maintained a 4-3 majority after that tough night, but it wouldn’t last much longer. Two more Republicans, Trey Allen and Richard Dietz, flipped Democratic-held seats in 2022, giving their party a 5-2 edge on the Supreme Court.
Newby, who now had both the authority of the chief justice and a partisan majority to back him up, swiftly set about exercising his new power.
While the outgoing Democratic majority had ruled in December of 2022 that partisan gerrymandering violated the state constitution, Newby authored the decision overturning it the following April. Republicans in the legislature quickly passed a new congressional map that eliminated three Democratic seats and made a fourth one considerably redder.
Newby has also made extensive use of his influence over judicial bodies across the state. In an in-depth profile of Newby last year in ProPublica, Doug Bock Clark explained how the chief justice demoted or forced out “as many as nine senior judges with little public explanation.”
And it’s not just judges who are in danger. Clark’s sources said Newby’s team ejected many court employees who were “outspoken liberals or openly LGBTQ+” and replaced them with ardent conservatives.
Newby and his allies could soon see their power grow even more dramatically. The GOP-dominated legislature recently passed a bill that would allow the Republican justices to unilaterally remove their Democratic colleagues—including Earls—from the bench. Democratic Gov. Josh Stein denounced the proposal in vetoing it last month, but an override remains possible.
But while the GOP’s back-to-back wins in 2020 and 2022 left Republicans in control of the bench, Democrats soon began planning a long-term push to retake the court in 2028. First, they had to focus on defending the two seats they still held.
They achieved step one in 2024 when Justice Allison Riggs defeated Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin by 734 votes, a loss Griffin would spend six months attempting to overturn.
A win for Earls this fall, meanwhile, would give Democrats another key victory heading into the crucial 2028 election year, when Newby, Berger, and Barringer’s seats will be on the ballot.
Poll Pile
IA-Sen: Emerson College for Nexstar:
Ashley Hinson (R): 50, Josh Turek (D): 45.
Aug.: 48-45 Hinson.
NH-Sen: Fabrizio, Lee & Associates for the NRSC:
John Sununu (R): 37, Chris Pappas (D): 36, all others 1% or less.
IA-Gov: Emerson:
Rob Sand (D): 49, Zach Lahn (R): 46.
Aug.: 48-43 Sand.
NY-Gov: Concord Public Opinion Partners for Education Reform Now Advocacy:
Kathy Hochul (D-inc): 50, Bruce Blakeman (R): 34.
Education Reform Now Advocacy is an affiliate of Democrats for Education Reform. In May, DFER praised Hochul for signaling her support for a new federal school voucher program, but she has yet to decide whether New York will participate.
FL-09: SEA Research & Political Design for Darren Soto:
Soto (D-inc): 41, Dan Green (R): 41.
FL-16: SEA for Kelly Kirschner:
Kirschner (D): 40, Sydney Gruters (R): 39.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/john-fetterman-little-interest-senator-be74e7a3
John Fetterman...article explains itself
I'll elaborate a little: leaked texts showed he didn't care about a children's hospital in Philadelphia visiting Washington or care about Medicaid cuts.
I'm leaning towards joining my local Indivisible chapter sometime before the election, so that's something I'm looking forward to.
I figured once Joe Manchin told me to stay involved in politics, I would. But he probably wouldn't approve of this group.