🔗 Share this article

Through a unsigned decision, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted Texas to implement a revised congressional district plan that may create up to five new Republican-leaning districts. The six-to-three decision, issued on Thursday, grants a petition by the state to set aside a federal judge's block that had struck down the new map in November.

Court's Rationale

The federal judge wrongly interjected itself into an active primary campaign, generating significant confusion and upsetting the sensitive federal-state balance in elections, the justices wrote in explaining its ruling.

The federal court had determined that Texas had likely grouped voters according to their race – a practice known as racial gerrymandering – when it adopted the boundaries. It had ordered the state to employ the maps drawn after the 2020 census for the forthcoming election.

Strong Dissent

With a sharply worded objection, Justice Elena Kagan criticized the court's decision. She argued that it disrespected the work of the district court, noting that its opinion was actually authored by a judge nominated by former President Donald Trump.

While our court is superior in jurisdiction, we are not superior in making these fact-intensive determinations, Kagan wrote in a opinion co-signed by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She continued, This court's stay ensures that Texas's redistricting plan, with all its boosted partisan advantage, will govern next year's elections. And it means that many Texas residents, for no good reason, will be grouped in electoral districts because of their race. And that result, as this court has declared year in and year out, is a violation of the law of the land.

National Map-Drawing Fight

The court's action is part of a national battle over the redistricting of electoral maps. Texas is an essential part in efforts to transform the U.S. House map to secure a narrow Republican control. Typically, boundary revision happens after a new decade's census. Yet the move by Texas Republicans to move ahead with a bold off-cycle redistricting earlier this year set off a series of events among other states.

GOP lawmakers in states like North Carolina and Missouri have also passed redistricting plans that might create a number of more GOP-friendly seats. Democratic lawmakers, in response, have pushed back with new maps in states like California and Virginia, which might neutralize those projected gains.

Political Reactions

The Texas AG welcomed the High Court's decision. In a comment, he said the order defended Texas's fundamental right to draw a map that ensures representation aligned with the GOP. Our state is leading the charge to reclaim the nation, one district and one state at a time, he remarked.

In contrast, opposition party officials criticized the decision. It is deeply disheartening that the Court has endorsed this severely racially gerrymandered plan from Texas Republicans, said the leader of a major party campaign committee.

A top Democratic leader argued the court had another time eroded its legitimacy by rubber-stamping a racially gerrymandered map. This decision from the Court's far-right bloc proves extremists are willing to rig elections. The Texas map is a discriminatory power grab targeting Black and Latino voters, he added.