Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Texas
Related: About this forumSupreme Court allows Texas to use Trump-backed congressional map in midterms
I was afraid of this. The filing deadline is Monday, Dec 8. The gerrymandered maps will be used.
Link to tweet
https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/04/politics/supreme-court-allows-texas-to-use-trump-backed-congressional-map-in-midterms
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.
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.
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court allows Texas to use Trump-backed congressional map in midterms (Original Post)
LetMyPeopleVote
14 hrs ago
OP
SSJVegeta
(2,135 posts)1. Its perplexing watching bad people do bad things to themselves.
But I will allow it!
LetMyPeopleVote
(173,536 posts)2. Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:
Link to tweet
Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:
"[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."
"[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."
LetMyPeopleVote
(173,536 posts)3. Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:
Link to tweet
Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:
"[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."
"[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."