Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LetMyPeopleVote

(174,319 posts)
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 06:14 PM Dec 4

Supreme Court allows Texas to use Trump-backed congressional map in midterms

Source: CNN

The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Texas to use a congressional map that will boost President Donald Trump’s effort to keep Republicans in control of Congress, blocking a lower court decision that found the new boundaries were likely unconstitutional because they were drawn based on race.

The decision could have significant consequences for next year’s midterm elections, which will determine control of the House for the final two years of Trump’s presidency. Had Texas been blocked from using its new map, it would have upended Trump’s nationwide push to avoid a Democratic House majority.

The court issued a brief unsigned opinion granting Texas’s request over the objection from the court’s three liberal justices.

In its brief order, the Supreme Court said that a lower court that ruled against the map likely did so in error, in part because it failed to honor “the presumption of legislative good faith by construing ambiguous direct and circumstantial evidence against the legislature.”

...The legal battles over Trump’s mid-decade congressional redistricting strategy will continue to play out in coming weeks. Last week, the Justice Department sued officials in California over new maps meant to give Democrats in the Golden State an edge next year. A court is set to hear arguments in that case next month.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/04/politics/supreme-court-allows-texas-to-use-trump-backed-congressional-map-in-midterms




?s=20
23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court allows Texas to use Trump-backed congressional map in midterms (Original Post) LetMyPeopleVote Dec 4 OP
Of course they did Bluestocking Dec 4 #1
EXPANDING THE GOD DAMN SUPREME COURT SHOULD BE A MAJOR PRIORITY! Chasstev365 Dec 4 #2
This message was self-deleted by its author Chasstev365 Dec 4 #3
Yep.............. Lovie777 Dec 4 #4
Supreme Court Allows Texas to Continue Self Immolation. NT Xipe Totec Dec 4 #5
Deadline Legal Blog-Supreme Court sides with Texas in challenge to congressional map deemed discriminatory LetMyPeopleVote Dec 4 #6
Looks like he's saying, "Hmmm. Very nice. I like the variety of pastel colors." C Moon Dec 4 #7
So, Roberts... GiqueCee Dec 4 #8
He won't be impeached Polybius Dec 4 #15
I can dream, can't I? GiqueCee Dec 4 #20
Is this a joke? choie Dec 4 #9
Nothing those 6 pigs say makes sense wolfie001 Dec 4 #19
If and when we control the Senate we should impeach them question everything Dec 4 #10
Impeaching anyone isn't going to happen unless we have a super majority. cstanleytech Dec 4 #12
I wouldn't impeach for decisions we don't like Polybius Dec 4 #16
So the LilElf70 Dec 4 #11
That map was drawn with the assumption the Rs would Phoenix61 Dec 4 #13
I don't trust hot wheels and his criminal rePUKE gang conducting a free and fair election ever in texASS wolfie001 Dec 4 #18
Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan: LetMyPeopleVote Dec 4 #14
6 piles of festering shit wolfie001 Dec 4 #17
The Trump Supreme Whorehouse doesn't disappoint. dalton99a Dec 4 #21
Another blow to what remains of the integrity of the Court. TomSlick Dec 4 #22
Here is a good explanation of this decision by Prof. Hasen of the Election Law Blog LetMyPeopleVote Dec 5 #23

Chasstev365

(7,017 posts)
2. EXPANDING THE GOD DAMN SUPREME COURT SHOULD BE A MAJOR PRIORITY!
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 06:17 PM
Dec 4

after we kick the Republicans ass in 2026!

Response to LetMyPeopleVote (Original post)

Lovie777

(21,578 posts)
4. Yep..............
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 06:24 PM
Dec 4

but alas, it allows other states to do the same, therefore, states with a sizable amount of population, which in most part are blue, might have an advantage, although shithole and republicans want to control the consensus.

See why republicans want to rid POC from the country.

LetMyPeopleVote

(174,319 posts)
6. Deadline Legal Blog-Supreme Court sides with Texas in challenge to congressional map deemed discriminatory
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 06:36 PM
Dec 4

A lower court ruling authored by a Trump-appointed judge said the new map was likely an illegal racial gerrymander.

BREAKING: Supreme Court sides with Texas in challenge to congressional map deemed discriminatory

MS NOW (@ms.now) 2025-12-04T23:23:52.723Z

https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/texas-redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymander

The Supreme Court sided with Texas over civil rights groups in an emergency challenge to the Donald Trump-backed congressional map that aimed to benefit Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented from the Republican-appointed majority’s decision to put the Trump-backed map in play on Thursday. The majority granted Texas emergency relief because, it said, the state would likely succeed in its appeal.

Writing for the dissenting trio, Justice Elena Kagan said the majority’s order “ensures that many Texas citizens, for no good reason, will be placed in electoral districts because of their race. And that result, as this Court has pronounced year in and year out, is a violation of the Constitution.”

After a divided three-judge panel deemed the state’s map to be likely racially discriminatory on Nov. 18, Texas filed an emergency appeal to the high court. The appeal initially went to Justice Samuel Alito, the justice assigned to field such requests from that region. On Nov. 21, Alito issued an order temporarily halting the lower court ruling, pending further review by the full bench of justices.

Texas argued that the map it produced over the summer in response to Trump’s call was motivated by politics (which the Supreme Court has allowed), not race. The state noted that California worked to add Democratic seats to its congressional delegation in response to Texas’ move.

GiqueCee

(3,311 posts)
8. So, Roberts...
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 06:50 PM
Dec 4

... you're staring down a double barrel of limited options: Retirement, or impeachment. You are a disgrace to the legal profession, and your name will be reviled for centuries to come. Same goes for the lowlifes that join you in the Sinister Six.

choie

(6,525 posts)
9. Is this a joke?
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 07:02 PM
Dec 4

"In its brief order, the Supreme Court said that a lower court that ruled against the map likely did so in error, in part because it failed to honor the presumption of legislative good faith by construing ambiguous direct and circumstantial evidence against the legislatature"?

wolfie001

(6,962 posts)
19. Nothing those 6 pigs say makes sense
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 09:51 PM
Dec 4

It's all about power at this point. Power for the christo-fascists.

cstanleytech

(28,167 posts)
12. Impeaching anyone isn't going to happen unless we have a super majority.
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 08:07 PM
Dec 4

We can however expand SCOTUS and put into place actual Judges that are less likely to issue rulings that favor their own political beliefs and or party.

LilElf70

(1,347 posts)
11. So the
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 07:51 PM
Dec 4

Last edited Fri Dec 5, 2025, 02:31 AM - Edit history (1)

Supreme Court don't understand what racism and corruption means?

Phoenix61

(18,684 posts)
13. That map was drawn with the assumption the Rs would
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 08:29 PM
Dec 4

keep the increased share of the Latino vote they saw in 2024. Considering the latest polling that’s not going to happen. There’s a good chance the new map will hand districts to Dems the Rs would have kept with the old map. Wouldn’t that be sweet?

wolfie001

(6,962 posts)
18. I don't trust hot wheels and his criminal rePUKE gang conducting a free and fair election ever in texASS
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 09:49 PM
Dec 4

I hope the voters can prove me wrong. Uphill battle fighting those foul racists.

LetMyPeopleVote

(174,319 posts)
14. Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 08:35 PM
Dec 4


Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:

"[T]his Court reverses that judgment based on its perusal, over a holiday weekend, of a cold paper record. 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. That is why we are supposed to use a clear-error standard of review—why we are supposed to uphold the District Court’s decision that race-based line-drawing occurred (even if we would have ruled differently) so long as it is plausible. Without so much as a word about that standard, this Court today announces that Texas may run next year's elections with a map the District Court found to have violated all our oft-repeated strictures about the use of race in districting. Today's order disrespects the work of a District Court that did everything one could ask to carry out its charge—that put aside every consideration except getting the issue before it right. And today's order disserves the millions of Texans whom the District Court found were assigned to their new districts based on their race. Because this Court's precedents and our Constitution demand better, I respectfully dissent."

wolfie001

(6,962 posts)
17. 6 piles of festering shit
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 09:47 PM
Dec 4

Comey Barrett and Kavanaugh were touring saying how they needed to stand firm in the face of withering criticism. All of it well-deserved. Foul POS all 6.

LetMyPeopleVote

(174,319 posts)
23. Here is a good explanation of this decision by Prof. Hasen of the Election Law Blog
Fri Dec 5, 2025, 10:56 AM
Dec 5

I have been following Prof. Hasen for a long time

Breaking: Supreme Court on 6-3 Party Line Vote, Allows Texas to Use Its Re-redistricting Maps for 2026 Congressional Elections electionlawblog.org?p=153359

Rick Hasen (@rickhasen.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T23:11:29.191Z

https://electionlawblog.org/?p=153359

The majority opinion is short and unsigned. It makes essentially two points:

The district court made two legal errors in preliminarily evaluating the merits. First, the district court should have presumed more good faith on Texas’s behalf when they drew the maps, and the failure of the plaintiffs to produce alternative maps (that could achieve the same partisan goals without as much racial sorting) was a “dispositive” or “near dispositive” reason to lose on the merits.

In looking at the other factors for granting a stay, including balancing the hardship of the parties, the Court, without naming Purcell, invokes the Purcell principle on timing. “The District Court improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign, causing much confusion and upsetting the delicate federal-state balance in elections.”

Justice Alito, for himself and Justice Gorsuch briefly concurred to respond to two points in the dissent. It is interesting that he characterizes California’s gerrymander also as a partisan gerrymander, which seems to send a signal to the lower court in that case: “the dissent does not dispute—because it is indisputable—that the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.” (Disclosure: I have filed this amicus brief in the California case).

The dissenters make a number of arguments on the merits, and on the proper deferential standard of review that is says should apply to a finding of racial predominance, but the timing point is surely right, and I fear that even more re-redistricting will be on the way, perhaps even later in the year if the Supreme Court waters down or kills Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in the Callais case.


Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court allows Texa...