Through a per curiam decision, the nation's top court permitted Texas to employ a revised congressional boundary scheme that could add up to five additional GOP-friendly districts. The 6-3 decision, issued on Thursday, grants a petition by the state to lift a lower court's ruling that had struck down the redistricting plan in November.
Justices' Rationale
The lower court improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign, causing much confusion and disturbing the sensitive equilibrium in elections, the justices wrote in explaining its decision.
That lower court had earlier ruled that Texas had probably grouped voters according to their race – a method known as racial gerrymandering – when it passed the boundaries. It had instructed the state to employ the boundaries established after the last decennial survey for the forthcoming election.
Sharp Dissent
Through a forcefully written dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan objected to the court's ruling. She contended that it undermined the work of the district court, observing that its decision was written by a judge selected by ex-President Donald Trump.
Our position is above the district court, but our capability is not greater for resolving such fact-driven issues, Kagan wrote in a opinion co-signed by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
She continued, Today's ruling solidifies that Texas's redistricting plan, with all its enhanced political tilt, will control next year's elections. And it means that many Texas residents, for no good reason, 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 law of the land.
Countrywide Redistricting Fight
This decision is part of a nationwide fight over the redistricting of electoral maps. Texas is an essential part in campaigns to alter the U.S. House map to secure a fragile Republican majority. Ordinarily, redistricting happens after a ten-year survey. Yet the action by Texas Republicans to move ahead with a bold mid-cycle redistricting earlier this year triggered a wave among other states.
Conservative legislators in including North Carolina and Missouri have also approved redistricting plans that are estimated to yield several more GOP-friendly seats. Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, have countered with their own plans in including California and Virginia, which are intended to balance those projected gains.
Political Responses
Lone Star State AG hailed the High Court's decision. In a release, he said the order upheld Texas's basic authority to draw a map that secures electoral outcomes favorable to the GOP. Texas is paving the way as we take our country back, district by district, state by state, he remarked.
Conversely, Democratic officials lamented the outcome. 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 senior Democratic leader stated the court had once again eroded its standing by rubber-stamping a race-based 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.
