Federal court blocks new Texas congressional map for 2026
By: Eleanor Klibanoff (The Texas Tribune)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Texas cannot use its new congressional map for the 2026 election and will instead need to stick with the lines passed in 2021, a three-judge panel ruled Tuesday.
The decision is a major blow for Republicans, in Texas and nationally, who pushed through this unusual mid-decade redistricting at the behest of President Donald Trump. They were hoping the new map would yield control of 30 of the state's 38 congressional districts — up from the 25 they currently hold — and help protect the narrow GOP majority in the U.S. House.
"The public perception of this case is that it's about politics," U.S. Judge Jeffrey Brown, a Trump appointee, wrote in the ruling striking down the new lines. "To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map. But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map."
Brown ordered that the 2026 congressional election "shall proceed under the map that the Texas Legislature enacted in 2021." The case will likely be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but time is short: Candidates only have until Dec. 8 to file for the upcoming election.
The map cleared the GOP-controlled Legislature in August and was quickly signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott. Several advocacy groups sued over the new district lines, saying lawmakers intentionally diluted the voting power of Black and Hispanic Texans and drew racially gerrymandered maps. Over the course of a nine-day hearing in El Paso earlier this month, they aimed to convince the judges that it was in voters' best interest to shelve the new map until a full trial could be held.
"A federal court just stopped one of the most brazen attempts to steal our democracy that Texas has ever seen," Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu, D-Houston, said in a statement. "Greg Abbott and his Republican cronies tried to silence Texans' voices to placate Donald Trump, but now have delivered him absolutely nothing."
It was not immediately clear if the state still has a legal path to restoring the new map in time for 2026. Unlike most federal lawsuits, which are heard by a single district judge and then appealed to a circuit court, voting rights lawsuits are initially heard by two district judges and one circuit judge, and their ruling can only be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Tuesday's decision came from a three-judge panel made up of Brown; U.S. District Judge David Guaderrama, a Barack Obama appointee; and Judge Jerry Smith, who was appointed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by Ronald Reagan. The ruling comes 10 days into the monthlong period when candidates can sign up for the March primary.
In the meantime, the ruling has set off a cascade of political maneuvering among members of both parties who had been operating under the notion that the Republican map would stick. Democrats, rather than facing retirement or primaries against fellow incumbents, are now freed up to run in their current districts. The bevy of Republican candidates who had signed up to run in districts newly drawn to favor them will now have to hope for an intervention from the Supreme Court or face far less favorable election prospects.
Austin Democrats Greg Casar and Lloyd Doggett had engaged in a shadow primary over the summer over who would represent the remaining Austin Democratic seat, an amalgamation of their two current seats. Doggett ultimately announced he would retire if the maps were upheld, clearing the way for Casar.
But after the court's ruling, Casar said in a statement that he would run in his old district, Texas' 35th Congressional District, provided the decision stands, clearing the way for Doggett to remain in Congress in the 37th Congressional District.
"The Trump Abbott maps are clearly illegal, and I'm glad these judges have blocked them," Casar said. "If this decision stands, I look forward to running for reelection in my current district."
The map ruling would also resolve an emerging primary in Texas' 18th Congressional District, where Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee and former Houston City Council member Amanda Edwards are competing in a Jan. 31 runoff to finish out deceased Rep. Sylvester Turner's term. Rep. Al Green, D-Houston, had filed to run in the newly drawn 18th Congressional District, setting up a clash with either Menefee or Edwards. But Green could now run in his current district, the 9th Congressional District, and avoid that scenario.
This is just the opening gambit in what promises to be a yearslong legal battle over Texas' congressional map. A lawsuit over the state's 2021 redistricting — including its state legislative and education board seats — went to trial earlier this summer and remains pending before the same three-judge panel. The judges have indicated they may want to see how the U.S. Supreme Court rules on a major voting rights case before issuing their full ruling on Texas' maps.
But for Trump, and many of his Republican supporters in Texas, the short-term goal of having this map for the 2026 election was as important as the long game.
"I'm convinced that if Texas does not take this action, there is an extreme risk that [the] Republican majority will be lost," Sen. Phil King, R-Weatherford, said on the floor of the state Senate before the new map passed. "If it does, the next two years after the midterm, there will be nothing but inquisitions and impeachments and humiliation for our country."
The state had argued that the entire redistricting process was based on a partisan goal, which the U.S. Supreme Court has previously said courts cannot intervene to prevent. But the plaintiffs pointed to a letter sent from the U.S. Department of Justice directing Texas to redraw its maps to eradicate four majority non-white districts, arguing that was the original sin that cast a racially discriminatory pall over the whole process.
In Tuesday's ruling, Brown said it was difficult to analyze the DOJ letter because it contained "so many factual, legal and typographical errors." But the fact that had pointed to that letter repeatedly as the impetus for redistricting was enough, they said.
"The Governor explicitly directed the Legislature to draw a new U.S. House map to resolve DOJ's concerns. In other words, the Governor explicitly directed the Legislature to redistrict based on race," Brown wrote on behalf of the judges. "In press appearances, the Governor plainly and expressly disavowed any partisan objective and instead repeatedly stated that his goal was to eliminate coalition districts and create new majority-Hispanic districts."
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that are known plagiarists, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt/deflect the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted. Any use of the term "Brandon", "Traitor Joe", or any variations thereof, when referring to President Biden, will be deleted. Right wing trolls can expect to have their irrelevant questions and comments deleted. Posting debunked lies will be subject to deletion. Use of the terms "leftist" or "lefty" will also be subject to deletion. ©
Tags
Who is online
68 visitors
Great news out of Texas!
Even a Trump appointed judge voted that the Texas gerrymandering is unconstitutional. He can expect to get majorly insulted.
Somebody's having a bad week
A well-deserved bad week.
When even the MAGA judge says you’re racist.
Ha Ha Ha!
That was my exact first reaction, too. To laugh out loud.
The Trumpist regime is suing to overturn California's recent Prop 50 victory claiming it was racial gerrymandering. It's not. It's going to be true poetic justice when California's redistricting is allowed and Texas's redistricting isn't.
The good people of CA voted for their redistricting. Not the same thing at all
can't wait for someone to argue about this
Yes, we did. By a 2 to 1 margin with an enormous voter turnout. I was totally amazed to see how many people were at the polls during the middle of the day (when we went to vote) on a Tuesday to vote on a single issue ballot with no candidates running. I just could not believe it. It was awesome. The determination to oppose the Trumpist regime was fierce. I was really proud of our people. It was a very exciting, very special day.
I am excited you were 'excited'! Cheers! As for my part, I vote by mail ever since it started and I switched to it.
We have done the drop off thing in a few recent elections, but I actually enjoy voting in person.
My friend, you are a 'traditionalist' in your own way.
I liked voting period. And it did not bother me to go out and vote (will do it whenever necessary). Let's just say I get 'short-circuited' on going to the polls to vote by all the 'easy' mail-in provisions (including sample and official ballots) that come my way—automatically now. (I have to do nothing but Choose, Sign, Date, Return.)
I can't 'argue' with that!
Otherwise, all those mailers and printed out materials would be a waste. 
That would be brutal. Republicans did not see that coming.
Once again republicans learn the hard way that when you change the rules to suit yourself, those rules change for everyone. Texas redistricting fails whereas the California redistricting (done as a purely defensive action) will succeed, totally fucking up republican's attempt to cheat and keep the House red.
The difference is that Texas' redistricting disenfranchises minorities which is illegal. Cali's redistricting, if anything, empowers them.
Redistricting in Missouri is being challenged by petition and may be overturned. Trump's easy fix hasn't been that easy, after all.
Well this ought to flatten the governor’s tires.
Yet again, we see Republicans nominate non partisan judges who do what they think the case demands, democrats nominate partisan soldiers.
Propaganda. Fake.
In many cases that's all they got...
They have gaslighting. And, projection too. Don't forget projection!
There it is! That 'spin' that we love(hate) so well. . . . Sigh, at the least, I hope MAGA supporters do not send those obligatory and unsolicited pizzas out. . . .
You have got to be kidding me.. LOL
Emphatically. Judge Aileen Cannon is a study in partisan judgeship and is 'beloved' on the Right.
The larger issue I have with conservatives use of the constitution is their strident insistence that this aged and highly regarded document should remain in stasis without any new recognition of the changes in our society or the sciences or amendments accordingly. Thus, no new amendments are forthcoming from the Right.
Our constitution is old in years and as a document it cries out for enhancements which can aid in a development of arguments for the future of a pluralistic society aspiring to give respect, justice, consideration, and yes even love to all of us.
LMAO!!!
Here in Cali we're still gonna use our new map. Our voters have spoken.