🔗 Share this article

Through a per curiam ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted Texas to implement a revised congressional boundary scheme that could add several five new GOP-friendly districts. The six-to-three decision, released on Thursday, approves a request by the state to set aside a federal judge's injunction that had struck down the redistricting plan in November.

Court's Reasoning

The district court erroneously placed itself into an ongoing primary campaign, generating significant confusion and upsetting the sensitive balance of power in elections, the order stated in detailing its decision.

The federal court had earlier ruled that Texas had probably grouped voters based on their race – a method known as illegal race-based districting – when it enacted the new maps. It had instructed the state to revert to the boundaries drawn after the 2020 census for the upcoming election.

Strong Opposition

With a strongly worded dissent, Justice Elena Kagan objected to the court's ruling. She argued that it disregarded the work of the lower court, noting that its ruling was crafted by a judge nominated by ex-President Donald Trump.

We are a higher court than the district court, but we are not a better one when it comes to making such a fact-based decision, Kagan argued in a opinion supported by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She continued, The majority's order solidifies that Texas's new map, with all its boosted partisan advantage, will govern next year's elections. And it guarantees that many Texas residents, unjustly, will be sorted in electoral districts based on their race. And that result, as this court has stated repeatedly, is a infraction of the constitution.

Countrywide Map-Drawing Struggle

This decision is part of a national battle over the redrawing of electoral maps. Texas is a crucial component in pushes to alter the U.S. House map to bolster a narrow Republican majority. Typically, redistricting occurs after a decennial population count. Yet the action by Texas Republicans to initiate a brazen off-cycle redistricting earlier this year triggered a wave among other states.

Conservative legislators in states like North Carolina and Missouri have also passed new maps that are estimated to yield a number of more Republican-leaning seats. Democrats, for their part, have countered with new maps in states like California and Virginia, which are intended to balance those potential gains.

Partisan Responses

Lone Star State top lawyer hailed the High Court's decision. In a comment, he said the order defended Texas's basic authority to draw a map that guarantees representation supportive of Republicans. We are setting the precedent for restoring our country, through each electoral district and individual state, he remarked.

In contrast, Democratic representatives criticized the decision. The Court's approval of this extreme, racially gerrymandered Texas GOP map is profoundly disappointing, said the leader of a major Democratic election organization.

Another senior House leader argued the court had yet again eroded its standing by upholding a racially gerrymandered map. Tonight's ruling by far-right justices on the supreme court is further proof that the extremists will do anything to rig the midterm elections. The gerrymandered Texas congressional map is a partisan and racially discriminatory power grab designed to subvert the will of the voters – particularly in Black and Latino communities, he added.