🔗 Share this article

Via an unsigned decision, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted Texas to implement a revised congressional district plan that could add several five additional Republican-leaning districts. The six-to-three order, issued on Thursday, upholds a request by the state to set aside a federal judge's ruling that had rejected the redistricting plan in November.

Justices' Explanation

The lower court improperly inserted itself into an ongoing primary campaign, creating much confusion and upsetting the sensitive equilibrium in elections, the justices wrote in explaining its ruling.

That lower court had determined that Texas had likely sorted voters according to their race – a method known as illegal race-based districting – when it enacted the boundaries. It had mandated the state to employ the maps established after the 2020 census for the forthcoming election.

Stinging Dissenting Opinion

In a forcefully written objection, Justice Elena Kagan objected to the court's action. She contended that it disregarded the work of the district court, noting that its ruling was crafted by a judge selected by former President Donald Trump.

Our position is above the district court, but our capability is not greater for resolving such fact-driven issues, Kagan argued in a dissent joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She continued, The majority's order guarantees that Texas's new map, with all its increased partisan advantage, will control next year's elections. And it guarantees that many Texas residents, unjustly, will be grouped in electoral districts due to their race. And that result, as this court has stated consistently, is a breach of the U.S. Constitution.

Countrywide Map-Drawing Struggle

The court's action is part of a national fight over the remapping of electoral maps. Texas is a crucial component in campaigns to reshape the U.S. House map to protect a fragile Republican control. Usually, boundary revision takes place after a ten-year survey. Yet the move by Texas Republicans to initiate a bold off-cycle redistricting earlier in the summer set off a chain reaction among other states.

Republicans in states like North Carolina and Missouri have also passed new maps that are estimated to yield several additional GOP-friendly seats. Democratic lawmakers, for their part, have responded with their own plans in states like California and Virginia, which are intended to balance those projected gains.

Political Responses

The Texas AG welcomed the High Court's decision. In a release, he said the order defended Texas's fundamental right to draw a map that guarantees electoral outcomes favorable to his party. Texas is paving the way as we take our country back, district by district, state by state, he added.

On the other hand, Democratic representatives lamented the ruling. The Court's approval of this extreme, racially gerrymandered Texas GOP map is profoundly disappointing, said the chair of a major Democratic campaign committee.

A senior House figure argued the court had another time eroded its legitimacy by rubber-stamping a discriminatory map. The ruling demonstrates a willingness to subvert democracy. This Texas plan is a partisan, racially biased scheme to undermine voter will, especially in communities of color, he concluded.