In another classic instance of “Republicans aren’t allowed to do what Democrats do,” a federal court has ruled that Texas’s new congressional map is illegal.
A three-judge panel ruled 2-1 that the Texas Legislature violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by producing a “racially gerrymandered” map. Writing the majority decision, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown stated, “Without an injunction, the racial minorities the Plaintiff Groups represent will be forced to be represented in Congress based on likely unconstitutional racial classifications for at least two years.”
Brown then directed that the new congressional map be replaced with the previous 2021 map, rather than ordering the legislature to redraw it.
This decision represents a big blow to Republicans and their efforts to maintain majority control of the House in next year’s midterms. Not only does this effectively eliminate potentially five Republican seats, but it could also serve as a 10-seat swing in Democrats’ favor, since California gerrymandered its congressional map to eliminate five likely Republican seats to offset potential losses in Texas.
Adding to the irony is that the Trump administration pressured Texas to redraw its congressional map, arguing that its 2021 map violated the law because a number of its districts were racially gerrymandered.
In the 160-page decision, Brown rejected that argument, stating, “By all current appearances, there was no past discrimination in favor of minority coalitions for the state to remedy — and, therefore, no ‘strong basis in evidence’ to support the state’s purposeful and predominant consideration of race in the 2025 redistricting process.”
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, who spearheaded the redistricting, was clearly nonplussed by the ruling and blasted Brown, claiming he got the facts wrong. “The Legislature redrew our congressional maps to better reflect Texans’ conservative voting preferences — and for no other reason,” he said. “Any claim that these maps are discriminatory is absurd and unsupported by the testimony offered during 10 days of hearings.” He added, “This ruling is clearly erroneous and undermines the authority the U.S. Constitution assigns to the Texas Legislature by imposing a different map by judicial edict.”
State Attorney General Ken Paxton also criticized the court’s decision, promising to file a direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in hopes of obtaining a favorable ruling in time to use the new map.
Paxton observed, “Democratic states across the country, from California to Illinois to New York, have systematically reduced representation of Republican voters in their congressional delegations. But when Republicans respond in kind, Democrats rely on false accusations of racism to secure a partisan advantage.”
The Supreme Court may now be having to deal with two challenges to redistricting maps in two red states, both on the claim that they violate the law by engaging in race-based discrimination.
In truth, it’s that same old identity-based political ploy by Democrats. Cry “racism” when they object to a law or policy they see as weakening their political ambitions. And far too often, they find judges who are sympathetic to their claims.
The fact of the matter is that the Justice Department sees the Voting Rights Act prohibition against racial gerrymandering as pertinent in this instance because of the existence of so-called “coalition districts” that were intentionally created to be made up of a majority non-white population.
Brown ruled that this was a “legally incorrect assertion” by the DOJ. Ergo, it appears that the state of Texas and the DOJ are in a he-said-he-said argument against Brown over what exactly constitutes racial gerrymandering.
It’s hard to see the Supreme Court not weighing in on this increasingly divisive issue, given the redistricting actions across the country.
For now, this is a big win for Democrats.
