🔗 Share this article

Through a unattributed ruling, the nation's top court has allowed Texas to use a revised congressional district plan that is projected to include as many as five new GOP-friendly districts. The six-to-three ruling, issued on Thursday, grants a appeal by the state to set aside a federal judge's injunction that had rejected the redistricting plan in November.

Justices' Explanation

The federal judge wrongly interjected itself into an active primary campaign, generating considerable confusion and upsetting the delicate federal-state balance in elections, the supreme court said in detailing its ruling.

That lower court had previously found that Texas had likely grouped voters by their race – a practice known as racial gerrymandering – when it enacted the redistricting plan. It had mandated the state to use the boundaries established after the 2020 census for the next year's election.

Strong Dissent

With a sharply worded objection, Justice Elena Kagan objected to the majority's ruling. She stated that it disrespected the work of the district court, observing that its ruling was crafted 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 dissent joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Kagan added, This court's stay ensures that Texas's new map, with all its increased partisan advantage, will control next year's elections. And it means that many Texas voters, 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.

Countrywide Map-Drawing Fight

The ruling is part of a national contest over the remapping of electoral maps. Texas is an essential part in efforts to alter the U.S. House map to protect a slim Republican majority. Typically, boundary revision takes place after a decennial population count. Yet the action by Texas Republicans to initiate a brazen mid-cycle redistricting earlier this year set off a chain reaction among other states.

Republicans in states like North Carolina and Missouri have also approved redistricting plans that might create a number of more conservative seats. Democratic lawmakers, in response, have pushed back with their own plans in states like California and Virginia, which are intended to balance those projected gains.

Partisan Reactions

Lone Star State AG welcomed the supreme court ruling. In a statement, he said the order defended Texas's prerogative to draw a map that secures electoral outcomes aligned with the GOP. Our state is leading the charge to reclaim the nation, one district and one state at a time, he added.

Conversely, Democratic leaders criticized the outcome. It is deeply disheartening that the Court has endorsed this severely racially gerrymandered plan from Texas Republicans, said the leader of a major party election organization.

A top House leader stated the court had once again shredded its legitimacy by upholding a race-based 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 stated.