The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld Texas’s aggressive redistricting plan to redraw their congressional map. As a consequence of this decision, the state is now able to execute a plan including no more than five Republican-opposition districts. This ruling comes on the eve of the all important midterm elections. It comes just months after a lower court threw out the map in a ruling last November. The conservative majority issued the ruling with a 6-3 vote. Ironically, this decision now paves the way for Texas to pursue a mapping strategy that numerous critics have labeled as a regressive and racially discriminatory, partisan power grab.
We applaud the Supreme Court’s one critical decision. Specifically, it reversed the lower court’s decision to order Texas to start using the interim maps adopted following the 2020 census in the upcoming elections. Additionally, the lower court had determined without concluding that the redrawn map likely segregated voters based on race. This practice, known as racial gerrymandering, is illegal. The new congressional map is estimated to add three GOP members to the state’s Congressional delegation. Opponents are understandably horrified, arguing it subverts one of the bedrock principles of our democracy – fair electoral representation.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling, stating it defended the state’s right to draw congressional maps that ensure Republican representation. He emphasized, “Texas is paving the way as we take our country back, district by district, state by state.”
Nevertheless, dissenting voices on the court raised alarm bells. Just as it blindsided Evans, Justice Elena Kagan took an aim at the decision for disrespecting the work of the lower court in Evans. She continued, “This court’s stay ensures that Texas’s new map, which increases partisan gerrymandering, will determine the elections for the House of Representatives next year. In addition, this stay unlawfully subjects millions of Texas residents to electoral districts drawn purely because of their race.”
Political tensions are understandably high at the moment. That redrawn map couldn’t be happening at a more crucial time, with the 2022 midterm elections quickly approaching. Critics, including House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, have voiced strong opposition to the map, describing it as a blatant attempt to subvert voter will, especially among Black and Latino communities. Jeffries asserted that the court had “once again shredded its credibility by rubber-stamping a racially gerrymandered map in Texas.”
Fears over the impact of such a ruling go well beyond Texas. Critics argue that this approval could set a dangerous precedent for how states may redraw electoral maps in favor of partisan interests. Congresswoman Suzan DelBene released a statement, calling her deep disappointment about the Court’s decision. She lambasted it for voting to approve a map drawn by Texas Republicans that she described as an extreme, racially gerrymandered plan.
The court’s majority opinion called on federal judges to avoid disrupting state choices. The stakes are high, because these decisions concern legislative maps drawn entirely for the purpose of partisan advantage. Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi commented on the ruling, asserting that states have a “right to interfere with a state’s decision to redraw legislative maps for partisan reasons.”
Texas — with a new, Republican-drawn congressional map in hand — is readying itself for the next election. This enormously consequential decision will shape the political and racial landscape for a decade to come. This ruling underscores how debates about electoral fairness continue to rage. It reaffirms the importance of promoting state flexibility while exercising appropriate federal oversight in electoral matters.