When Politicians Attack Courts for Defending Democracy
Trump condemned Missouri's court for blocking a partisan redistricting map. The case reveals why gerrymandering is a democracy problem, not a partisan one.
By Common Good Policy Team · September 4, 2026 · Responding to The Hill
On Thursday, Missouri's Supreme Court unanimously blocked new congressional lines scheduled for the November election, ruling they hadn't legally taken effect. President Trump called the decision "ridiculously" in favor of blocking the plan.
Here's what matters: this isn't about one state's map. It's about whether elections are chosen by voters or whether maps are drawn to predetermine winners.
What Happened and Why It Matters
Redistricting happens every 10 years after the census. It's supposed to reflect population shifts. Instead, in most states, it's become a tool for the party in power to lock in electoral advantage before a single vote is cast. That's gerrymandering.
Missouri's court found that the new map didn't follow the legal process required by the state constitution. A unanimous decision, meaning both Democratic and Republican justices agreed, suggests the legal problem wasn't partisan. It was procedural.
When politicians attack courts for enforcing the rules on redistricting, they're essentially saying: "We want the power to choose our voters, not the other way around." That's not how democracy works.
Read the full article at The Hill
Why This Connects to Our Core Problem
The Common Good Party exists because democracy itself is broken. Gerrymandering is one of the clearest ways that happens. When maps are drawn to guarantee outcomes, swing districts disappear. Politicians stop competing for your vote. Instead, they appeal only to their party's base, the loudest, most ideological voices. Moderate, pragmatic people get pushed out. The country gets more polarized. Nothing gets solved.
This isn't a Democratic problem or a Republican problem. Both parties gerrymander when they can. Both attack courts when judges block their maps. Both benefit from a system that lets them pick their voters instead of letting voters pick their representatives.
What the Missouri court did, enforce the legal process, regardless of partisan outcome, is exactly what needs to happen in every state. Courts aren't being "ridiculous." They're being neutral.