🔗 Share this article

In a unsigned order, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted Texas to use a redrawn congressional boundary scheme that could add up to five additional GOP-friendly districts. The six-to-three order, released on Thursday, approves a petition by the state to set aside a district court's block that had struck down the new map in November.

Court's Rationale

The district court erroneously placed itself into an active primary campaign, causing significant confusion and upsetting the delicate federal-state balance in elections, the supreme court said in detailing its decision.

The district court had determined that Texas had probably sorted voters by their race – a act known as unconstitutional racial sorting – when it passed the boundaries. It had ordered the state to use the maps created after the most recent national count for the forthcoming election.

Sharp Dissenting Opinion

In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Elena Kagan objected to the court's action. She argued that it disregarded the work of the lower court, noting that its ruling was crafted by a judge selected 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 joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She continued, This court's stay guarantees that Texas's new map, with all its increased favoritism, will govern next year's elections. And it guarantees that many Texas voters, for no good reason, will be placed in electoral districts based on their race. And that result, as this court has pronounced consistently, is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Countrywide Redistricting Fight

The ruling is part of a nationwide contest over the redrawing of electoral maps. Texas is a key piece in pushes to reshape the U.S. House map to secure a slim Republican hold. Ordinarily, redistricting occurs after a ten-year survey. Yet the move by Texas Republicans to initiate a brazen off-cycle redistricting earlier this year set off a wave among other states.

Conservative legislators in including North Carolina and Missouri have also enacted new maps that might create a number of additional GOP-friendly seats. Democratic lawmakers, for their part, have pushed back with their own plans in states like California and Virginia, which are intended to balance those projected gains.

Political Responses

Lone Star State attorney general hailed the supreme court ruling. In a statement, he said the order defended Texas's basic authority 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 remarked.

In contrast, opposition party representatives decried the outcome. It is deeply disheartening that the Court has endorsed this severely racially gerrymandered plan from Texas Republicans, said the chair of a major Democratic campaign committee.

Another senior Democratic leader stated the court had another time eroded its standing by rubber-stamping a discriminatory 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.