{"id":13,"date":"2026-05-15T16:37:11","date_gmt":"2026-05-15T16:37:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/homemovechronicle.com\/?p=13"},"modified":"2026-05-15T16:37:11","modified_gmt":"2026-05-15T16:37:11","slug":"the-seven-biggest-ongoing-gerrymandering-fights","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/homemovechronicle.com\/?p=13","title":{"rendered":"The Seven Biggest Ongoing Gerrymandering Fights"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This is <\/em>Executive Dysfunction<\/em>, a newsletter that highlights one under-the-radar story about how Trump is changing the law\u2014or how the law is pushing back\u2014and keeps you posted on the latest from Slate\u2019s Jurisprudence team. <\/em>Click here<\/em> to receive it in your inbox each week.<\/em><\/p>\n

Read more It Was One of DOGE\u2019s Most Absurd Abuses. A Court Finally Exposed It.<\/a><\/p>\n

The fallout from the Supreme Court gutting Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais<\/em> is in full swing, as red states are locked in a mad dash to implement new congressional maps that will secure more seats, sacrificing minority voters in nearly every circumstance. Lower courts are equally busy, with legal challenges being brought left and right by both Republicans and Democrats to stymie each other\u2019s power grabs and limit the damage in midterm elections that are now just six months away. Strap in as we use this week\u2019s newsletter to unpack the state of play in the U.S. gerrymandering wars.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n

Typically, states create new congressional maps every 10 years, in line with the national decennial census. However, last summer, President Donald Trump upended this practice when he urged Texas to redistrict middecade in order to net Republicans more congressional seats, an attempt to mitigate Democrats\u2019 expected sweep in the 2026 midterm elections. Texas enacted a new map that gave Republicans five new House seats, but California responded with its own tit-for-tat gerrymander, which also netted the country\u2019s largest Democratic state an additional five Democratic seats. Other Republican-leaning states, including Ohio, Utah, and North Carolina, jumped in to follow suit.<\/p>\n

Then, last month, there was another shock to the system. The U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in Callais<\/em>, and overnight the national redistricting effort leveled up, as states were no longer bound to create districts that prioritized minority voters. Literally within hours, Florida\u2019s Republican-controlled Legislature passed a new congressional map that would net Republicans four additional seats. We\u2019re now about two weeks out from Callais<\/em> becoming public, and more states are jumping into the fire, though as we noted in this newsletter last week, this is a fight to the bottom that hurts voters and American democracy.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, redistricting is happening whether we like it or not. It may well determine the balance of power in Washington this year and onward, making it one of the most politically salient issues today. To help everyone understand and track what is happening with redistricting and where, here are the latest legal battles over congressional maps we are keeping an eye on.<\/p>\n

\n1. Virginia<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

After Virginia\u2019s Supreme Court late last week rejected Democrats\u2019 new electoral map, one that would have flipped four Republican-held U.S. House seats to Democrats, Attorney General Jay Jones asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. The emergency application argues that the Virginia\u2019s Supreme Court\u2019s 4\u20133 decision amounted to \u201cjudicial defiance\u201d of the will of the state\u2019s voters, who voted in favor of a middecade congressional redistricting effort last year. The question at the heart of this legal challenge has to do with the timing of the referendum posed to voters, with the Virginia Constitution preventing amendments unless there is an intervening election between the first and second votes on a proposed amendment that is introduced and passed in the Legislature.<\/p>\n

As Slate\u2019s Alexis Romero explained, the Virginia Legislature voted on Democrats\u2019 new congressional map and then introduced it to voters right before last year\u2019s November election; after voters approved it, the Legislature again voted on the measure in February. But the state\u2019s Supreme Court ruled that the 2025 election had already begun when the Legislature passed the amendment the first time, because the first early voters had already cast their ballots. By that standard, Virginia\u2019s Legislature did not put a full election between its first proposed amendment vote in October and its second in February, since some mail-in ballots were received before Democrats unveiled their new map.<\/p>\n

Jones\u2019 last-ditch effort to get the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene is risky. The court has only the final word on federal law and does not traditionally weigh in on state Supreme Courts\u2019 decisions. Virginia is asking a conservative majority court to upend this practice, which could come back to bite Democrats all over the country in any number of potential voting cases. Given the court\u2019s 2023 ruling, though, in Moore v. Harper<\/em>\u2014and given the partisan stakes\u2014SCOTUS is unlikely to act, meaning that Virginia\u2019s Democratic gerrymander is all but dead.<\/p>\n

\n2. Louisiana<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

Within 24 hours of the Supreme Court releasing its decision in Louisiana v. Callais<\/em>, Gov. Jeff Landry canceled his state\u2019s May 16 House primary election until state lawmakers can pass a new congressional map. Meanwhile, numerous lawsuits have been filed against Landry that seek to block the suspension of the May 16 election.<\/p>\n

Still, the state that successfully killed Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is inching closer to finalizing a new congressional map that would give the GOP one more House seat in Louisiana. The state Senate voted on Wednesday to advance a map that preserves a Black-majority district in New Orleans while splintering the only other Black-majority district in Baton Rouge. This map still has a ways to go in Louisiana\u2019s Legislature, but if it is ultimately adopted, it would be the third set of congressional maps the state has had since the 2020 census. Wednesday\u2019s vote came after Louisiana\u2019s Senate held a contentious committee hearing where lawmakers considered four different maps, three of which eliminated at least one or both of the state\u2019s Black-majority districts. Four of the state\u2019s sole Black legislators pleaded with their colleagues to preserve Louisiana\u2019s two Black-majority districts in a state where a third of voters are Black. Hundreds of residents were also in attendance.<\/p>\n

\n3. Alabama<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a lower court order that had forced Alabama to use a court-imposed House map until the 2030 census, but a group of Black voters quickly filed suit to prevent a new map from taking effect. The Supreme Court\u2019s decision meant that Alabama could use a map that state lawmakers created in 2023 that eliminates one of only two Black-majority districts.<\/p>\n

The plaintiffs in this case are seeking a restraining order from a district court, while on Tuesday, Gov. Kay Ivey announced that a special primary election for the four affected congressional districts would be held on Aug. 11 after the state voided its May 19 primary, for which early voting was already underway. Pending what the district court rules, the August primary is expected to reflect the 2023 map drawn by Alabama Republicans that eliminates one of two Black-majority districts. This will net Republicans in Washington one more congressional House seat.<\/p>\n

Alabama had been locked in litigation over its congressional maps since 2020, when a group of Black voters and civil rights groups sued the state for creating a congressional map that they argued was in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. District courts continuously found that the state\u2019s map did indeed violate the VRA, and the Supreme Court even sided with those lower courts as recently as 2023. Ultimately, though, the justices granted Alabama\u2019s appeal to restore its 2023 map with an unsigned order on Monday, in the wake of Callais<\/em>.<\/p>\n

\n4. Tennessee<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

Within days of the Supreme Court issuing its Callais<\/em> decision, Tennessee lawmakers pulled together a new U.S. House map that carves up the state\u2019s sole Black-majority district, effectively awarding Republicans all nine of Tennessee\u2019s congressional districts for this year\u2019s midterms. Within hours of Gov. Bill Lee signing the new map into law, the NAACP\u2019s Tennessee chapter jumped in to challenge its legality. The group is also suing Lee and the Tennessee General Assembly, arguing that proper procedures were not followed when Lee called a special session to redraw congressional maps and asking a court to stop the new map from going into effect. On Tuesday, the Davidson County Chancery Court set a hearing for the NAACP\u2019s case for May 21. Tennessee\u2019s primary election is Aug. 6.<\/p>\n

\n5. Illinois<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

Back in 2011, Illinois adopted its own Voting Rights Act, and the same week that the Supreme Court issued its Callais<\/em> decision, Illinois House members passed an amendment that would have taken a provision within the federal VRA and brought it into Illinois\u2019 version. However, after Callais<\/em>, Democratic lawmakers decided against moving forward with the amendment. Nevertheless, the conservative group Public Interest Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit hoping to weaken Illinois\u2019 VRA, arguing that it violates the 15th<\/sup> Amendment.<\/p>\n

Read more How You, Yes, You, Can Make a Difference When It Comes to Climate Change\u2014and Just About Anything Else<\/a><\/p>\n

However, as Slate\u2019s Mark Joseph Stern noted, even if Illinois is forced to \u201cunpack\u201d its majority-minority congressional districts, it could end up simply spreading out the state\u2019s Democratic voters more efficiently, and Republicans wouldn\u2019t end up with any more seats. The lawsuit also stands to threaten other state-level VRAs where Republicans may try to seek more power.<\/p>\n

\n6. Missouri<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

On Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court enacted a new congressional map created by the state\u2019s Republican lawmakers that breaks up a Democratic seat in Kansas City.<\/p>\n

The decision ruled on two separate legal challenges that were initiated last year, when Missouri first began a middecade redistricting effort at the urging of President Donald Trump. The first lawsuit argued that the new Republican congressional map violated the Missouri Constitution\u2019s decennial rule for redistricting middecade and its compactness requirement.<\/p>\n

The second legal challenge has to do with a statewide petition that gathered over 300,000 signatures in opposition to the Missouri law that enacted the middecade congressional map, which Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins has yet to validate. The Missouri Constitution allows laws to be suspended when a referendum petition is submitted and meets the minimum threshold of signatures with at least two-thirds of the state\u2019s congressional districts, but the Missouri Supreme Court rejected the argument that the new map must be temporarily blocked. Hoskins has until late July to validate the petition, and Missouri\u2019s primary is Aug. 4. A last-minute decision, even if in favor of the petition, could still make it nearly impossible to stop the primary.<\/p>\n

\n7. South Carolina<\/strong>
\n<\/h3>\n

Up until Wednesday, it seemed as though South Carolina was taking a back seat in the redistricting wars. Five Republicans joined all Democrats in opposing a measure that would have enabled the Senate to consider a redistricting vote, even after the current legislative session ends later this week. And Republican Gov. Henry McMaster was dismissing calls to order a special legislative session, until Wednesday. Unnamed sources told Politico that McMaster is expected to announce a special session on redistricting, which will tee up South Carolina\u2019s sole Black-majority district, held by longtime Democratic stalwart Jim Clyburn, for the chopping block.<\/p>\n

A special session will allow Republican members of South Carolina\u2019s Legislature to pass a new congressional map with a simple majority. The state\u2019s June 9 primary is less than a month away, and early voting is supposed to begin at the end of May. It\u2019s a striking turnaround, since 24 hours earlier, South Carolina Republican Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey had delivered an impassioned speech defending his decision to oppose any redistricting efforts to eliminate the state\u2019s single Black-majority district. Massey noted that carving Democrats out of South Carolina\u2019s congressional maps completely would risk the state losing an influential figure the next time there is a Democrat in the White House.<\/p>\n

We hope you learned a thing or two from this edition of Executive Dysfunction, and if you enjoyed reading it, please consider <\/em>supporting our legal journalism by becoming a Slate Plus member<\/em>!<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Elsewhere in Jurisprudence<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n