Redistricting and Reapportionment

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares83 Views

    Texas Republicans Look to Jam Democrats With Vote on Redistricting

    by

    By taking up new congressional maps pushed by President Trump first, Republicans hope to discourage Democrats from walking out of a special session before they vote on flood relief.Republicans in the Texas Legislature are planning to hold off on voting on measures to address the state’s deadly July 4 flooding until after they approve a partisan redistricting of Texas’ U.S. House boundaries, hoping to thwart Democrats’ efforts to block new House maps, according to two people briefed on the discussions.Republican leaders gaveled in the special legislative session on Monday, called by Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican with an ambitious list of demands for the session. The biggest by far are flood response, driven by a disaster that killed at least 135 people, and redistricting, driven by President Trump.Public hearings on the floods start on Wednesday in Austin and in hard-hit Kerrville next week. Hearings on redistricting will span the next two weeks in Austin, Houston and the Dallas area.Texas Republicans had been working quietly for several months to take up Mr. Trump’s call for an aggressive redrawing of the state’s congressional maps, aiming to gain five additional Republican seats in the U.S. House and help the party keep control of the chamber after the 2026 midterms.Then the floods hit on July 4 and prompted calls for state leaders to improve warning systems and provide disaster relief.Now those two imperatives — one a natural disaster, the other overtly political — could create an incendiary atmosphere as the legislative session builds steam, with just 30 days to accomplish both.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 100 Shares62 Views

      in Elections

      Newsom Wants California to Counter Texas on Redistricting

      by

      Gov. Gavin Newsom says California should redraw its own congressional districts if Texas tries to gerrymander its lines. His idea faces long odds.When Arnold Schwarzenegger, then the governor of California, urged voters to “terminate gerrymandering” 15 years ago, most welcomed the chance to take some power away from politicians.In 2010, more than 60 percent of voters approved a measure that put the job of drawing California’s congressional map in the hands of an independent commission instead of with partisan lawmakers.Now one of Mr. Schwarzenegger’s successors, Gov. Gavin Newsom, is threatening to blow up California’s system for a partisan purpose.As Texas considers an extraordinary middecade redrawing of its maps to help Republicans win more seats in Congress and to satisfy President Trump, Mr. Newsom has said California should counter with a similar move to help Democrats.Never mind that legal scholars have described his proposals as far-fetched. The longest of long shots. A path that would require political gymnastics and subvert California’s high-minded approach.Mr. Newsom, in suggesting that California play hardball politics, seems determined to show that he is a Democratic warrior trying to beat Republicans at their own game.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Texas Legislature Special Session Will Answer Questions About Redistricting, Floods

      by

      A special session of the Texas Legislature will address the deadly floods in Hill Country, but the fireworks will come from President Trump’s demand for a newly gerrymandered House map.A special legislative session in Texas, set to begin on Monday in the wake of the flood in Texas Hill Country, is shaping up to be an emotionally raw diversion into what Democrats say is the gerrymandering the state’s House districts.Lawmakers will also take up questions about the handling of the devastating July 4 floods, which killed more than 130 people, including at least 37 children. Nearly 100 Texans remain missing.But that bipartisan imperative will be complicated by a hard-edge partisan agenda for the session, dominated by President Trump’s push for the Legislature to redraw the state’s congressional district maps to be more favorable for Republicans. He wants his party to gain five seats in Texas in the 2026 midterm elections to help retain control of the U.S. House.Gov. Greg Abbott has asked lawmakers to also consider a dozen other items during the 30-day special session, including new hard-line conservative proposals to ban mail-order abortion pills, lower property taxes and regulate intoxicating hemp. And he wants lawmakers to consider a state constitutional amendment that would empower the state attorney general to prosecute election crimes.“It’s a wild situation,” said State Representative Jon Rosenthal, a Houston-area Democrat. “The past sessions I’ve been a part of have been of a very limited scope.”Most Texans’ attention will probably lie with the July 4 flood and what can be done to improve warning systems, such as placing outdoor sirens along flood-prone waterways like the Guadalupe River, where most of the deaths occurred.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Broach Potential Walkout to Block Texas Redistricting

      by

      Hakeem Jeffries, the House Democratic leader, told Texas Democrats on a call on Tuesday that the moment required everyone to take extraordinary actions.National Democratic leaders are encouraging state Democrats in the Texas House to consider walking out of a special legislative session this month to block Republicans from redrawing the state’s congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.At the same time, President Trump held his own call on Tuesday with congressional Republicans in the state, urging them to carve out five new G.O.P. seats from those held by Democrats, according to a person briefed on that call, which was first reported by Punchbowl News.“Just spoke to our Great Congressmen and women of Texas,” Mr. Trump wrote on social media. He added, “I keep hearing about Texas ‘going Blue,’ but it is just another Democrat LIE.”The redistricting of House seats is supposed to come at the beginning of each decade, after new census data shifts populations and changes the number of seats granted to each state. Reapportionment in the middle of the decade is rare and almost always contentious, since it is driven by political considerations, not demographic shifts. In this case, Mr. Trump is openly trying to use new maps to stave off midterm Democratic gains that would potentially cost his party control of the narrowly divided House.“It is important that we fight back,” said U.S. Representative Lizzie Fletcher, a Democrat whose Houston district could be affected. “What is happening is absolutely an unacceptable betrayal of Texans.”During the Democratic call on Monday evening, which lasted for more than two hours, the Democratic leader in the U.S. House, Hakeem Jeffries of New York, and the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Ken Martin, spoke with about 40 Democrats in the Texas House.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Punts Decision on Louisiana Voting Map Until Next Term

      by

      The justices asked that the case, which has implications for the political power of Black voters, be reargued next term.The Supreme Court declined on Friday to weigh in on Louisiana’s contested congressional voting map, instead ordering that new arguments be scheduled during its next term.There was no explanation offered for why the justices did not make a decision or set a date for new arguments. All but one paragraph in the six-page order was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the lone dissent.Justice Thomas wrote that it was the court’s duty to hear such congressional redistricting challenges and that the justices had “an obligation to resolve such challenges promptly.”It is the latest twist in a winding legal battle over whether Louisiana drew congressional districts that fairly empower all voters after the 2020 census. The case has been closely watched, given that a decision striking down Louisiana’s map could affect the balance of power in the narrowly divided House of Representatives.For now, the state’s latest map, which the State Legislature approved in January 2024, will remain in place. That map paved the way for a second Black Democrat, Cleo Fields, to join Representative Troy Carter, a New Orleans-area Democrat, in the state’s congressional delegation. It was the first time in decades that Louisiana had elected two Black members of Congress, and allowed Democrats to pick up a second seat in the state.One-third of the state’s population is Black.“Although we hoped for a decision this term, we welcome a further opportunity to present argument to the court regarding the states’ impossible task of complying with the court’s voting precedents,” Liz Murrill, the Louisiana attorney general, said in a statement shared on social media.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      The Major Supreme Court Decisions in 2025

      by

      <!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–> <!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [!–> <!–> –><!–> –>Police Use of Excessive Force<!–> –><!–> [!–> Barnes v. Felix <!–> –> <!–> –> <!–> –> <!–> –><!–> [!–> 9-0 ruling on May 15 <!–> –> <!–> –><!–> [!–> <!–> Liberal bloc Sotomayor Jackson Kagan Conservative bloc Roberts Kavanaugh Barrett […] More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Ohio Voters Reject Ban on Partisan Gerrymanders

      by

      Voters in Ohio rejected a ban on partisan gerrymandering of state legislative and congressional districts on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press, after a ferocious battle that included accusations of political trickery.The Ohio ban was perhaps the most closely watched in an unusually consequential list of democracy-related issues presented to voters in ballot initiatives and amendments to state constitutions.Before the proposed amendment appeared on voters’ ballots, polls showed that the idea had broad approval among the state’s voters. But Republicans, who dominate Ohio politics, pushed back, crafting what critics called a misleading summary of the proposal that appeared on the ballots. It said the measure would establish a “taxpayer funded” commission that would be “required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts.”The Ohio Supreme Court’s four Republicans voted to uphold the language; the three Democrats voted to strike it down. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      With Robinson Candidacy, North Carolina Republicans Fear Damage to Years of Gains

      by

      Explosive posts by the Republican candidate for governor, Mark Robinson, are sending waves of anxiety through a state party that has long been tactical and disciplined.The great Republican wave that swept the South starting in the late 20th Century — the very wave that Lyndon Johnson predicted after signing the Civil Rights Act in 1964 — came relatively late to North Carolina. But when it finally hit in 2013, with Republicans controlling both the legislature and the governor’s mansion for the first time since Reconstruction, it did so with breathtaking force. Led by a group of savvy, tactically skilled state lawmakers, North Carolina Republicans set out to undo decades of center-left policy enshrined by Democrats, and to remake the rules of the political game in their favor.They engaged in gerrymandering that ensured the party a near-lock on the state legislature and lopsided control of the state’s House delegation in Congress. They paved the way for a conservative state Supreme Court that upheld a strict voter ID law. And after gaining a veto-proof majority last year, they banned most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy.And while Republicans lost the governorship in 2016, they had harbored hope of winning full control of state government again this year, bringing North Carolina in alignment with most other Southern states.Then came Mark Robinson.Long before this week, when CNN reported that Mr. Robinson had called himself a “black NAZI!,” discussed his pornography habits and praised slavery in an adult online forum, the bellicose Republican nominee for governor (and current lieutenant governor) was polling poorly against his Democratic rival, Josh Stein.But now more than ever, Mr. Robinson, with his antisemitic and anti-gay rhetoric and performative, polarizing brand of politics, is sending waves of anxiety through the state party.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Appeals Court Further Narrows Voting Rights Act’s Scope

      by

      Reversing decades of precedent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in a Texas case that different minority groups cannot jointly claim that their votes have been diluted.A federal appeals court further narrowed the scope of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ruling that members of separate minority groups cannot join together to claim that a political map has been drawn to dilute their voting power.The 12-to-6 ruling on Thursday by the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned almost four decades of legal precedent, as well as an earlier ruling by a three-judge panel of the same appeals court. It applies only in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, the three states where the court has jurisdiction, but the decision has national implications and may be appealed to the Supreme Court.The case involved districts for county commissioners in Galveston County, Texas, a community of about 350,000 people, where the last round of redistricting redrew a district in which Black and Hispanic voters together made up a majority of voters. The redrawn boundaries reduced their combined share of the district’s electorate to 38 percent, and a lawsuit claimed that doing so violated Section Two of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits drawing maps that dilute minority voting power.A lower court and the three-judge appellate panel both ruled that the new map was a clear violation of the law. But the full Fifth Circuit disagreed, saying that the law does not explicitly allow voters from more than one minority group to “combine forces” to claim their votes were diluted.The 12 judges in the majority were all appointed by Republican presidents. Five of the six dissenters were named by Democratic presidents. More