The Indiana Supreme Court has stepped into one of the closest elections imaginable, overturning a recount decision and handing Republican state Sen. Spencer Deery victory by just three votes.

The dramatic ruling came only hours after the state’s five justices heard arguments over six disputed ballots — ballots that ultimately determined who won the Republican nomination in Indiana Senate District 23.

At the center of the showdown was a consequential question: Should legitimate voters have their ballots thrown out because election workers failed to put required stamps or signatures on them?

The state’s highest court has now answered that question in Deery’s favor.

The ruling restores six ballots cast for Deery and makes him the Republican nominee over Trump-endorsed challenger Paula Copenhaver by a razor-thin final count of 6,335 to 6,332.

The court ordered the Indiana Recount Commission to certify the revised totals and directed election officials to resume preparations for the general election with Deery listed as the GOP candidate.

The justices did not immediately provide their full reasoning, saying a more detailed written opinion will follow.

For Deery, however, the decision was about something much larger than saving his political career.

“I think it’s important that Indiana draw a line that says when voters do their part, that vote shouldn’t be at risk of either incompetence or even intentional incompetence by individuals who want to change that vote,” Deery said.

Six Ballots Flipped the Entire Race

The extraordinary legal battle began after Deery emerged from the May Republican primary with an almost impossibly narrow three-vote advantage over Copenhaver.

Copenhaver challenged the result and sought a recount.

The Indiana Recount Commission subsequently threw out several ballots, including six votes for Deery that were missing required county clerk markings.

That single decision completely reversed the election.

Instead of Deery winning by three votes, Copenhaver was certified as the winner — also by three votes — with a tally of 6,332 to 6,329.

Deery took the fight to court.

His attorneys argued that the voters themselves had followed the rules and should not have their votes erased because election officials failed to carry out administrative requirements.

They pointed in part to Indiana law allowing ballots to be counted when voters fulfill their obligations but election officials fail to perform theirs, provided there is no evidence of fraud, tampering or misconduct.

That distinction became a major focus during arguments before the Indiana Supreme Court.

Several justices pressed attorneys on why the six votes should be discarded when there had been no evidence presented showing the ballots were fraudulent.

Justice Mark Massa questioned how ordinary voters could possibly be expected to know whether election officials had properly placed the required markings on their ballots.

Justice Derek Molter raised another striking point: The six disputed ballots came from three different counties, prompting questions about how they could realistically represent some coordinated scheme rather than legitimate votes affected by administrative errors.

Copenhaver’s attorneys countered that clerk seals and election-worker signatures are important safeguards designed to authenticate absentee ballots and protect the integrity of elections.

But the court ultimately sided with Deery.

Trump Endorsement Raised the Stakes

The three-vote battle also carried political implications far beyond a single Indiana Senate district.

President Donald Trump had endorsed Copenhaver after Deery opposed a congressional redistricting proposal backed by Trump.

Deery wasn’t alone.

Several Republican state senators who resisted the redistricting effort subsequently found themselves facing primary challengers.

Trump-backed candidates successfully defeated six incumbent Republican senators. Deery and fellow state Sen. Greg Goode, however, survived challenges stemming from the same political fight.

Deery said outside organizations poured millions of dollars into efforts targeting Republican lawmakers who opposed the redistricting push.

“The track record isn’t good for people in my shoes,” Deery said, adding that simply surviving the challenge could prove to be one of the most significant political contests of his career.

Copenhaver, meanwhile, said she disagreed with the Supreme Court’s ruling but accepted its authority and wished Deery well.

She continued to argue that the ballot-authentication requirements involved in the case serve an important role in guarding against potentially invalid votes.

Election Clock Was Already Ticking

The Supreme Court’s intervention came with Indiana election officials facing rapidly approaching deadlines.

Counties are required to begin mailing absentee ballots by September 19, with in-person early voting scheduled to begin October 6.

The court had already halted distribution of general-election ballots for Senate District 23 while Deery’s appeal was being considered.

Now the uncertainty is over.

After a primary, a recount, a reversed result and a battle before Indiana’s highest court, election officials have been cleared to move forward.

And after every legal challenge and every disputed ballot, the margin separating the winner from the loser remains almost unbelievably small:

Three votes.

MS NOW’s Morning Joe took its criticism of Sen. Tim Scott to an unusual new level Thursday, with hosts and panelists joining hands for an on-air “prayer” after blasting the South Carolina Republican over his fiery speech at the GOP’s midterm convention.

The spectacle unfolded after the program aired footage of Scott rallying Republicans in Dallas, where he called for party unity behind President Donald Trump and warned that the upcoming elections represent a fight over the future direction of the country.

Scott, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, used the high-profile appearance to make the case for Republican Senate candidates while delivering a forceful warning about Democrats.

“The only way to keep dangerous, radical, weird out of the Senate is a united Republican Party,” Scott told the crowd before urging Republicans to stand with Trump.

Scott described the midterm elections as “a battle for the heart of our nation,” before leveling an even sharper accusation at Democrats.

“They hate our culture. They hate what it means to be American,” Scott said before repeatedly declaring that Republicans would not back down.

Scott delivered the speech with considerable energy, raising his voice and, at one point, opening his jacket and pounding his chest as the crowd cheered.

That performance apparently struck a nerve with Morning Joe co-host Joe Scarborough.

After the program replayed Scott’s remarks Thursday morning, Scarborough immediately took aim at the Republican senator.

“Speaking of weird, that was really weird,” Scarborough said.

Scarborough objected not only to Scott’s animated delivery but also to his assertion that Democrats hate America and its culture.

But the segment took a far stranger turn when Scarborough brought Rev. Al Sharpton into the conversation and asked him to respond.

“First, we should all join hands and pray for him,” Sharpton responded.

And they did.

The panelists stretched their hands across the table and began holding hands on live television as Sharpton launched into the impromptu prayer.

“Bring him back in, Lord!” Sharpton said during the prayer.

Scarborough then invoked “baby Jesus,” adding an unmistakably joking element to the spectacle.

Co-host Mika Brzezinski pushed back on the idea that the entire exercise was a joke, saying she was genuinely praying. Sharpton similarly insisted that he was serious.

The criticism of Scott didn’t stop when the prayer ended.

Sharpton argued that Scott’s convention performance had crossed a line beyond ordinary political advocacy for Trump. He questioned why the senator would characterize Democrats in such sweeping terms and said that, despite his own frequent criticism of Republicans and Trump, he does not broadly accuse them of hating America.

Scarborough echoed that argument, saying that even when he vehemently disagrees with Republican policies, he doesn’t automatically conclude that Republicans “hate America.”

The unusual exchange quickly drew attention, particularly because the panel mixed political attacks, humor and religious imagery while targeting Scott, who has frequently and publicly spoken about the importance of his Christian faith.

Scott’s office didn’t respond with a lengthy statement.

Instead, spokesman Nathan Brand delivered a three-word answer to Fox News Digital:

“Bless their hearts.”

The Morning Joe controversy followed what was already one of the Republican convention’s most aggressive speeches.

As chairman of the NRSC, Scott is tasked with helping Republicans win Senate races across the country, and he used his Dallas appearance to put several Democratic candidates directly in his sights.

Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico was among them.

Scott went after Talarico over previous remarks involving God and gender, telling the convention that Talarico “believes God is non-binary.”

Talarico has previously acknowledged controversy surrounding some of those remarks, saying he “missed the mark.”

Scott also targeted Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, accusing him of associations with extremists.

But Scott’s broader message extended beyond individual candidates.

He portrayed the November Senate elections as a fundamental choice between Republicans aligned with Trump and Democratic candidates he argued are far outside America’s political mainstream.

And after a speech that triggered an extraordinary response on Morning Joe, Scott ended by returning to the themes of faith, family and freedom.

“We are one nation always under God,” Scott said. “We are always on the side of truth, family and freedom.”

The U.S. Supreme Court just threw a major wrench into Republicans’ plans for the 2026 midterms — and the stakes could hardly be higher.

In a dramatic Thursday intervention, the nation’s highest court blocked Missouri from using its newly drawn Republican congressional map in November, temporarily shutting down a redistricting effort that could have helped the GOP capture seven of the state’s eight U.S. House seats.

The brief Supreme Court order came with no noted dissents.

Instead, the justices granted an emergency request from People Not Politicians and activist Richard von Glahn, halting a lower federal court ruling that would have required Missouri to conduct November’s elections under the controversial new boundaries.

The immediate result is enormous.

Unless something changes, Missouri’s 2022 congressional map will remain in effect for November, preserving districts that currently send six Republicans and two Democrats to Washington.

And at the center of the entire political showdown is Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver’s Kansas City-area 5th Congressional District.

The Republican-backed map approved in 2025 would have dramatically reshaped Cleaver’s district, potentially opening the door for Republicans to flip the seat and walk away with seven of Missouri’s eight congressional districts.

Now, that plan has hit a massive roadblock.

“The law is the law, the Missouri constitution is clear, as was the Missouri Supreme Court,” von Glahn said in a statement.

He then took direct aim at Republican Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, who had fought to conduct the November election using the new boundaries.

Hoskins “has shown that he cannot effectively do the job he was elected to do,” von Glahn added.

A Legal War Erupts

The Supreme Court’s intervention is the latest twist in an extraordinary legal battle involving Missouri’s highest court, a federal judge, Republican state officials and now the U.S. Supreme Court.

Just two days earlier, U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark ordered Missouri to use the 2025 congressional map despite a conflicting decision from the Missouri Supreme Court.

Hoskins’ attorneys raced to the Supreme Court in an eleventh-hour attempt to preserve that ruling.

They argued that Clark’s order was the only thing “preventing the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of voters” who had already cast ballots in Missouri’s August primary under the new districts.

With the November election rapidly approaching, they argued that using the new map was the only practical way to “conduct congressional elections that comply with the federal election calendar.”

The Trump administration backed Hoskins as well, warning the Supreme Court that blocking the federal judge’s ruling would “jeopardize state officials’ ability to conduct a timely and lawful federal election.”

The justices nevertheless intervened.

And remarkably, this wasn’t even the first time the Missouri map battle reached the Supreme Court this week.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh on Tuesday rejected an earlier attempt by Hoskins to block the Missouri Supreme Court ruling preventing implementation of the 2025 map.

Trump-Era Redistricting Fight Explodes

The showdown dates back to a Republican redistricting push launched in 2025 as President Donald Trump encouraged GOP-controlled states to redraw congressional boundaries ahead of the crucial 2026 midterm elections.

Missouri Republicans ultimately approved a new map that would make Cleaver’s Democratic-held district considerably harder for his party to defend.

But opponents didn’t simply accept it.

They launched a referendum campaign — and gathered more than 300,000 signatures in an effort to put the new congressional boundaries directly before Missouri voters.

Hoskins rejected the referendum effort, maintaining that congressional redistricting legislation wasn’t subject to Missouri’s referendum process.

Missouri’s Supreme Court unanimously disagreed.

The state court ruled Sept. 3 that Missouri’s Constitution gives voters the power to approve or reject “any act of the general assembly” through referendum unless the Constitution specifically creates an exception.

The court concluded that no such exception exists for congressional redistricting.

It ordered Hoskins to certify the referendum and place the issue before voters in November.

Even more consequentially, the court ruled that the 2025 redistricting legislation never took effect because of the referendum petition.

That meant Missouri’s existing 2022 congressional map remained legally in force.

Then A Federal Judge Stepped In

Republican congressional nominee Rick Brattin, GOP Rep. Bob Onder and two voters subsequently brought a separate federal challenge.

Judge Clark sided with them Tuesday, concluding Missouri should conduct its general election using the same congressional districts that were used during the August primary.

Suddenly, Missouri was staring at two conflicting judicial directives — one coming from the state’s highest court and another from the federal judiciary.

That’s when the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in.

Thursday’s order halted Clark’s ruling, leaving the old congressional map standing as Missouri barrels toward November.

And time is rapidly disappearing.

Missouri’s deadline for finalizing ballots already passed Tuesday, while the first ballots are scheduled to be sent out Sept. 19.

Missouri’s Secretary Of State Faces Even More Trouble

For Hoskins, the congressional map fight isn’t his only problem.

The Republican secretary of state is now facing mounting pressure inside Missouri as well.

The Missouri Supreme Court scheduled a Thursday hearing to consider whether Hoskins should be held in contempt over his response to its previous order.

That adds another extraordinary dimension to a political and constitutional battle that has already traveled from Missouri’s courts to the federal judiciary and all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

And behind all of the legal maneuvering sits a brutally simple political reality:

Control of Congress is on the line.

Republicans saw Missouri’s new map as an opportunity to potentially turn an already strong 6–2 congressional advantage into a commanding 7–1 edge.

For now, the Supreme Court has stopped that plan in its tracks — leaving Missouri Republicans scrambling as the clock races toward November.