Redistricting — the art of drawing the district boundaries that determine representation — is messy, opaque, confusing, and inherently political. It typically happens only once a decade in each state, after the census produces new demographic data.
This article was originally published by Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization covering local election administration and voting access.
But that once-a-decade cadence now looks like the next political norm to fall.
It’s customary for the party in control of redistricting to draw maps that weaken the voting power of the opposition while maximizing its own political advantage. Gains in technology and data have made it possible to draw lines ever more precisely. “I define redistricting as the only legalized form of vote-stealing left in the United States today,” said the late Thomas Hofeller, a prominent Republican redistricting consultant — in 1991.
Even so, recent events suggest the current no-holds-barred political climate could take the partisan machinations of redistricting to a higher level.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott cited constitutional concerns when he called a special session of the state Legislature to draw new congressional maps, but there is also a clear political motive that Republicans haven’t been shy about discussing. Republicans currently hold a narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. The midterm elections are nearing, and the party in power typically loses seats. President Donald Trump, a Republican, has said that the Texas GOP should seek to redraw the lines in a way that allows them to add as many as five seats to the Republican column. A proposed map released this week aims to fulfill that objective.
Trump is reportedly also urging other Republican-controlled states, including Missouri, to consider redistricting in a way that would boost the GOP’s chances of picking up seats, though that could mean some incumbents will have to run in more competitive districts. Ohio is engaged in a legally mandated redistricting that Republicans, who control the process, also hope will yield more seats.
This has set off a sort of redistricting arms race, with Democratic leaders in other states saying they could redraw lines to offset Republican gains. Importantly, leaders in some states that have tried to make redistricting less partisan — by shifting control to commissions or adopting other limitations — are suggesting they intend to sidestep them.
For example, California has used an independent redistricting commission for decades, but Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said the heavily Democratic state must respond to the push in Texas by drawing new maps that benefit Democrats.
They’re not screwing around,” Newsom said. “We can’t afford to screw around either. We have got to fight fire with fire.”
Newsom and other Democratic leaders have said they’re seeking workarounds that would allow a midcycle redistricting in the state. For example, the state attorney general said he believes lawmakers could draw new maps that would be put before voters in a special election.
Democratic governors in Illinois, New York, and New Jersey have also said they’re exploring options, but the barriers are higher than in Texas.
In most of the states under Democratic control, maps already heavily favor Democrats — as in Illinois — or the legislature has limited authority over redistricting. Changing that on a timeline that would allow new maps for the midterms would be difficult.
One thing is certain: Any new maps are likely to face court challenges over how political power is distributed among districts. Those will come at a time when the Supreme Court may be poised to consider another challenge to the landmark Voting Rights Act.
At the end of the last term, the justices didn’t rule on a high-profile Louisiana redistricting case, instead announcing they would hear new arguments on it during the 2025-26 term.
Other redistricting cases, too, could be headed to the court. In the end, it’s hard to tell what will happen, except that voters — who have packed Texas legislative hearings on the redistricting proposal, even before proposed maps were released — may not have much say.
Carrie Levine is Votebeat’s editor-in-chief and is based in Washington, D.C. Contact Carrie at clevine@votebeat.org.
Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization covering local election integrity and voting access. Sign up for their newsletters here.