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 Trumps 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 years midterm elections, which will determine control of the House for the final two years of Trumps presidency. Had Texas been blocked from using its new map, it would have upended Trumps nationwide push to avoid a Democratic House majority.
The court issued a brief unsigned opinion granting Texass request over the objection from the courts 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 Trumps 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
Link to tweet
?s=20
Bluestocking
(447 posts)Chasstev365
(6,867 posts)after we kick the Republicans ass in 2026!
Response to LetMyPeopleVote (Original post)
Chasstev365 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Lovie777
(21,329 posts)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.
Xipe Totec
(44,450 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(173,536 posts)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 courts three Democratic appointees dissented from the Republican-appointed majoritys 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 majoritys 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 states 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 Trumps 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.
C Moon
(13,376 posts)GiqueCee
(3,135 posts)... 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.
Polybius
(21,283 posts)If Thomas and Alito weren't, Roberts won't be either.
GiqueCee
(3,135 posts)choie
(6,488 posts)"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
(6,673 posts)It's all about power at this point. Power for the christo-fascists.
question everything
(51,515 posts)cstanleytech
(28,097 posts)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.
Polybius
(21,283 posts)I would, however, impeach for illegal actions.
LilElf70
(1,269 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 5, 2025, 02:31 AM - Edit history (1)
Supreme Court don't understand what racism and corruption means?
Phoenix61
(18,658 posts)keep the increased share of the Latino vote they saw in 2024. Considering the latest polling thats not going to happen. Theres a good chance the new map will hand districts to Dems the Rs would have kept with the old map. Wouldnt that be sweet?
wolfie001
(6,673 posts)I hope the voters can prove me wrong. Uphill battle fighting those foul racists.
LetMyPeopleVote
(173,536 posts)Link to tweet
"[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 reviewwhy we are supposed to uphold the District Courts 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 chargethat 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
(6,673 posts)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.
dalton99a
(91,466 posts)TomSlick
(12,834 posts)We live in frightening times.