On September 12, the Missouri legislature passed HB 1, the bill to change the boundaries of U.S. House districts. Also on September 12, some Kansas City voters filed a lawsuit in state court, alleging that the new boundaries, and the very process of redrawing them in the middle of the decade, violates the Missouri Constitution. Wise v State of Missouri, Circuit Court, Jackson County, 2516-cv29597.

It’s possible that the referendum process might be used against the new districts, although that takes a difficult petition.

On September 3, the U.S. Supreme Court asked the Republican National Committee and the Mississippi Libertarian Party to respond to the state’s Reply brief in Watson v Republican National Committee, 24-1260. This case involves the Mississippi law that says absentee postal ballots are valid if they arrive in the elections administration office by three days after election day. The Fifth Circuit, in a surprise ruling, had said that the 1872 federal law telling states to hold congressional elections in the first week of November actually means that all ballots must be in the hands of the election office by the end of election day.

If the Fifth Circuit is correct, that means that the laws of 48 states are invalid.

Generally, when a case is filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the court to hear the case, there are never more than three rounds of briefs. First the losing side in the lower court asks the Court to hear the case. Then, sometimes, the side that won the case in the court below responds. Then, commonly, there is a Reply brief, and that is the end until the Court decides whether to hear the case or not. But in this case, the Court, having read three sets of briefs, wants a Reply to the Reply Brief. That is due October 3.

On September 11, U.S. District Court Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan, a Trump appointee, issued an opinion in West v Pennsylvania Department of State, w.d., 2:24cv-1349. It rejects the procedural objections to the lawsuit that the state had raised. The issue is the unequal Pennsylvania law on presidential elector candidates. Pennsylvania does not parties with 15% of the registered voters to submit any documents whatsoever from their candidates for presidential elector. The Democratic and Republican Parties simply send in a list of their candidates for presidential elector.

But other groups, and independent candidates, must submit separate declarations of candidacy from each of their presidential elector candidates. Furthermore, they must run a full slate of electors. In 2024, West would have been on the ballot in Pennsylvania, except that a few of his candidates for presidential elector did not properly complete the paperwork. Here is the order. It does say that the Department of State per se is not a proper defendant, but that doesn’t matter, because the Secretary of the Department is also a defendant.

Pennsylvania’s discriminatory handling of presidential elector candidates has not yet been declared unconstitutional, but it seems likely that it will be.