SCOTUS lets Democrats keep gerrymandered maps heading into midterms

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday it will allow California Democrats to move forward with their voter-approved gerrymandered maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Since the approval of Proposition 50, which seeks to reduce Republican congressional seats from nine to four by redrawing district boundaries, the state GOP and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have attempted to block the new maps. The application was presented to Justice Elena Kagan and referred to the full Supreme Court, which ultimately denied the injunction.

In response to the Supreme Court’s decision, Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom released a statement Wednesday blaming President Donald Trump for starting the redistricting “war.”

“Donald Trump said he was ‘entitled’ to five more Congressional seats in Texas. He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he’ll lose again in November,” Newsom wrote.

The campaign for Proposition 50, backed by Democrats and Newsom, began in July 2025 shortly after Texas announced plans to redistrict its congressional maps. After voters approved the measure in November 2025, Republicans quickly filed a lawsuit, bringing the case before a three-judge federal panel. The U.S. Department of Justice also intervened on the side of the plaintiffs.

The hearing took place over three days in December 2025, with the judges hearing testimony from experts and witnesses on both sides. The GOP argued that the Prop 50 maps had been drawn in one area to favor Hispanic voters, violating federal voting rights law.

After weeks of deliberation, the panel issued a 117-page ruling in January 2026. In a 2-1 decision, the judges rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments and upheld the maps.

“We find that Challengers have failed to show that racial gerrymandering occurred, and we conclude that there is no basis for issuing a preliminary injunction. Our conclusion probably seems obvious to anyone who followed the news in the summer and fall of 2025,” the filing stated.

While both U.S. District Judge Josephine L. Staton and U.S. District Judge Wesley L. Hsu voted to dismiss the plaintiffs’ arguments, U.S. Circuit Judge Kenneth K. Lee dissented.

In his statement in the filing, Lee argued that the Democratic supermajority in the state “wanted to curry favor with Latino groups and voters—and to prevent Latino voters from drifting away from the party.” The U.S. Circuit judge also pointed to statements from maps author Paul Mitchell, who had publicly acknowledged that race was a predominant factor in devising CD-13, testimony echoed by Republican Assemblymember David Tangipa.

Following the ruling, Republicans appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking a different outcome.

The California GOP has yet to release a public statement regarding the decision as of Wednesday afternoon.

All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!