🔗 Share this article

Through a unsigned decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed Texas to use a redrawn congressional district plan that could add several five additional conservative-tilting districts. The six-to-three decision, released on Thursday, grants a petition by the state to overturn a lower court's ruling that had invalidated the redistricting plan in November.

Justices' Reasoning

The district court erroneously placed itself into an ongoing primary campaign, causing considerable confusion and disrupting the fine balance of power in elections, the order stated in explaining its decision.

That lower court had earlier ruled that Texas had probably sorted voters according to their race – a practice known as racial gerrymandering – when it enacted the boundaries. It had mandated the state to use the boundaries drawn after the last decennial survey for the upcoming election.

Sharp Dissent

With a strongly worded dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan took issue with the majority's action. She contended that it disregarded the work of the district court, noting that its ruling was crafted by a judge selected by former 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 wrote in a opinion joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She continued, Today's ruling solidifies that Texas's redistricting plan, with all its enhanced favoritism, will control next year's elections. And it ensures that many Texas citizens, for no good reason, will be sorted in electoral districts because of their race. And that result, as this court has stated year in and year out, is a breach of the constitution.

National Map-Drawing Struggle

The court's action is part of a countrywide contest over the remapping of electoral maps. Texas is a crucial component in efforts to alter the U.S. House map to protect a slim Republican control. Ordinarily, map-drawing occurs after a ten-year survey. Yet the decision by Texas Republicans to proceed with a brazen mid-cycle redistricting earlier in the summer triggered a series of events among other states.

GOP lawmakers in states like North Carolina and Missouri have also enacted redistricting plans that could add a number of additional Republican-leaning seats. Democrats, for their part, have responded with new maps in states like California and Virginia, which could offset those potential gains.

Partisan Reactions

The Texas AG welcomed the High Court's decision. In a statement, he said the order protected Texas's basic authority to draw a map that guarantees electoral outcomes supportive of his party. We are setting the precedent for restoring our country, through each electoral district and individual state, he stated.

Conversely, opposition party representatives decried the decision. It's incredibly disappointing that the Court has rubber stamped a map enacted by Texas Republicans which, simply put, is an extreme, racially gerrymandered map, said the chair of a major Democratic election organization.

A top Democratic figure stated the court had another time damaged its standing by approving a racially gerrymandered map. The ruling demonstrates a willingness to subvert democracy. This Texas plan is a partisan, racially biased scheme to undermine voter will, especially in communities of color, he concluded.