By Chelsea Lenora Small,
Forward Times
https://www.forwardtimes.com/
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, November 21, temporarily blocked a lower-court ruling that had prohibited Texas from using its newly drawn congressional map in the 2026 elections. The emergency order — signed by Justice Samuel Alito — grants the state a brief but significant reprieve as the justices consider whether the map, engineered to expand Republican power, can be used while litigation continues.
The order came roughly an hour after Texas urged the Court to intervene, arguing that allowing the lower-court decision to stand would cause “chaos and confusion” ahead of candidate filing deadlines and the March primary elections. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has issued similar stays in recent years, including in redistricting cases from Alabama and Louisiana, where lower-court rulings came too close to upcoming elections.
For now, the federal panel’s finding that the 2025 map was racially gerrymandered remains on hold. The stay will last at least several days — and potentially longer — while the justices review the state’s full request.
Lower Court: Race, Not Politics, Drove Mid-Decade Redraw
On Tuesday, November 18, a three-judge federal panel in El Paso ruled 2–1 that Texas’ mid-decade redistricting plan likely violated federal protections for Black and Latino voters. Judge Jeffrey Brown, a Trump appointee, wrote that “substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map,” citing testimony, legislative records, and a detailed letter from the U.S. Department of Justice warning that the plan risked unlawful racial discrimination.
Judge David C. Guaderrama joined the opinion. Judge Jerry E. Smith dissented, signaling internal disagreement about whether Texas’ intent was racial or purely partisan.
The map — crafted under intense political pressure from President Donald Trump — dismantled five Democratic-leaning districts and strategically reconfigured several urban districts to give Republicans an estimated five additional seats.
Gov. Greg Abbott criticized the lower-court ruling as “clearly erroneous,” later calling it a “gross misjudgment” that undermines the state’s constitutional authority. State officials have argued the new map reflects partisan objectives — something the Supreme Court ruled in 2019 cannot be challenged in federal court — rather than racial ones.
Texas Democrats disagreed sharply. Lawmakers including Rep. Gene Wu, Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, and Rep. Greg Casar praised the lower court’s finding, calling the map “one of the most brazen attempts” to dilute the voting power of Black and Latino Texans.
State Rep. Ron Reynolds said the panel’s opinion validated what civil rights advocates warned from the outset — that the map “targeted Black and Latino Texans with surgical precision.” He called the ruling “a major victory for democracy,” though Friday’s Supreme Court action now places that victory in limbo.
During the nine-day hearing last month, judges pressed GOP mapmaker Adam Kincaid and Texas Sen. Phil King about the design of the map. Judge Brown found both witnesses not credible, citing discrepancies in their accounts and questioning how “pure chance” could have consistently produced racially skewed outcomes.
The panel emphasized the DOJ’s letter as critical evidence. Though it contained typographical errors, the judges noted that it warned of racial — not partisan — concerns. Testimony also revealed that Kincaid reviewed the DOJ letter before it became public and communicated with Trump-aligned officials through self-deleting messages.
Unusual Mid-Decade Redistricting
Texas became the first state to meet Trump’s call for new GOP-friendly maps heading into the midterms. Missouri and North Carolina followed with redraws that added additional Republican seats, while California voters approved a ballot initiative expected to boost Democratic representation by five seats.
All three states now face lawsuits mirroring the challenges in Texas.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is considering a Louisiana case that could narrow Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — a ruling that may make it harder for minority voters nationwide to challenge racially discriminatory maps in the future.
What the Supreme Court’s Order Means for Houston — Right Now
The Supreme Court’s temporary stay means the GOP-drawn 2025 map could still be used in the 2026 elections if the justices ultimately side with Texas. For Houston, that would bring immediate consequences for two of the region’s most important congressional districts:
- Texas’ 9th Congressional District (Rep. Al Green)
- Texas’ 18th Congressional District, currently vacant following the passing of Congressman Sylvester Turner
Under the proposed map, the districts would be significantly reshaped:
- large portions of southern Harris County would be removed from CD-9
- Missouri City, Fort Bend Houston, Acres Homes, Third Ward, and parts of North Houston would be folded into a reconfigured CD-18
- Rep. Al Green’s residence would shift from CD-9 into CD-18, complicating the special election landscape
- long-standing majority-Black communities of interest would be fractured
These proposed changes have already caused candidate reshuffling, altered filing strategies, and raised fears of voter confusion ahead of multiple consecutive elections.
If the Supreme Court ultimately rejects the 2025 map, Texas would fall back to the 2021 congressional boundaries — restoring temporary stability to voters in CD-9 and CD-18. If the Court allows the GOP-drawn map to move forward, Houston’s political landscape could shift overnight.
Forward Times will continue following this developing story.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login