🔗 Share this article

In a unsigned ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted Texas to implement a newly configured congressional boundary scheme that could add up to five additional Republican-leaning districts. The 6-3 order, handed down on Thursday, approves a petition by the state to lift a federal judge's block that had invalidated the new map in November.

Justices' Reasoning

The district court wrongly interjected itself into an ongoing primary campaign, creating much confusion and disturbing the sensitive equilibrium in elections, the justices wrote in detailing its decision.

The district court had determined that Texas had likely classified voters by their race – a method known as unconstitutional racial sorting – when it enacted the new maps. It had ordered the state to revert to the maps drawn after the last decennial survey for the next year's election.

Stinging Dissent

Through a sharply worded dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan took issue with the majority's decision. She argued that it disregarded the work of the lower court, noting that its ruling was actually authored by a judge nominated by ex-President Donald Trump.

While our court is superior in jurisdiction, we are not superior in making these fact-intensive determinations, Kagan wrote in a dissent supported by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Kagan added, The majority's order solidifies that Texas's redistricting plan, with all its enhanced political tilt, will govern next year's elections. And it means that many Texas citizens, unjustly, will be placed in electoral districts based on their race. And that result, as this court has pronounced year in and year out, is a violation of the constitution.

National Map-Drawing Struggle

The ruling occurs during a national contest over the redistricting of electoral maps. Texas is a crucial component in efforts to reshape the U.S. House map to secure a slim Republican hold. Ordinarily, boundary revision takes place after a ten-year survey. Yet the decision by Texas Republicans to move ahead with a bold off-cycle redistricting earlier in the summer sparked a wave among other states.

Republicans in including North Carolina and Missouri have also enacted redistricting plans that could add a number of additional GOP-friendly seats. Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, have countered with new maps in states like California and Virginia, which are intended to balance those potential gains.

Political Reactions

The Texas attorney general praised the High Court's decision. In a statement, he said the order upheld Texas's prerogative 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 added.

Conversely, opposition party officials criticized the ruling. The Court's approval of this extreme, racially gerrymandered Texas GOP map is profoundly disappointing, said the leader of a major Democratic campaign committee.

A top Democratic leader argued the court had once again shredded its legitimacy 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.