March 4, 2026 - Since the 2000 census, there has been renewed mid-decade congressional redistricting activity by states. One widely known example of mid-decade redistricting occurred in Texas in 2003, when the state legislature redrew initial congressional boundaries that were adopted by a federal court in 2001.

3 weeks ago - Like many other states in the American South after the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, federal judges and the United States Supreme Court have struck down Texas's congressional and legislative districts on multiple occasions, including in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s.

The cases included on this page are grouped by decade. Use the links below to learn more about the redistricting cases decided in each of the decades listed: 2020s: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, Moore v. Harper, Merrill v.

Republican Gary Franks, elected in an overwhelmingly White district, strongly opposed majority-minority redistricting. He argued that majority-minority districts were unjust because they gave “some Americans a manufactured advantage over other Americans.” Franks, while still a member of the CBC, angered his CBC colleagues when he testified in federal court against a Georgia-based majority-minority district.

December 9, 2025 - And the disparity in registration rates between white and Black voters dropped from nearly 30 percentage points in the early 1960s to 8 percentage points just a decade later. Now the justices seem ready to wreck Section 2 if not strike it down ...

The Brennan Center tracks and analyzes ongoing litigation about redistricting. ... When congressional and legislative maps are redrawn each decade, they often are manipulated to discriminate against communities of color or for partisan gain. Courts, both state and federal, play an important role in keeping these practices in check.

An overview of significant Supreme Court decisions on redistricting from the last five decades. The cases are grouped into four categories: population, a case relating to using a redistricting commission, cases relating to race and cases relating to partisanship.

December 8, 2025 - But the prospect of a rare mid-decade redistricting returned to lawmakers’ agenda in July, after the Department of Justice sent the state a letter alleging that four of the state’s districts were unconstitutional because they were “coalition districts” – majority-minority districts that lack a single racial majority. If Texas didn’t “rectify” this “racial gerrymandering” immediately, the letter said, DOJ would take legal action. Two days after receiving the letter, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott directed the state’s legislators to draw a new congressional map that would address the concerns mentioned in the DOJ letter. Under the new map, adopted in August, Republicans hope to win as many as 30 of the 38 seats – an increase of five over the previous map. The new map quickly drew challenges from several groups of plaintiffs, led by the League of United Latin American Citizens, a civil rights group.

The rules of the game have been laid down by the United States Supreme Court. In the 1960s, the Court said that everyone must play, and must redraw their legislative and congressional districts every ten years to take account of changes in the population recorded by the federal census.

March 23, 2017 - In addition to various state processes, the legal framework for congressional redistricting involves constitutional and federal statutory requirements. Interpreting these requirements, in a series of cases and evolving jurisprudence, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued rulings that have significantly shaped how congressional districts are drawn and the degree to which challenges to redistricting plans may succeed.

A separate federal court lawsuit, Hodges v. Albritton, No. 8:24-CV-879 (M.D. Fla. 2024) challenges the redrawing of two adjacent state senate districts in the Tampa Bay region, contending that both districts are now unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. On March 31, 2025, a three-judge panel granted summary judgment in favor of the state defendants with respect to one of the challenged districts but denied summary judgment with respect to the other district.

February 13, 2026 - Explore how aggressive mid‑decade redistricting in Texas, California, and other states could reshape the 2026 midterms, alter the House majority, and revive fierce battles over partisan and racial gerrymandering.

2 days ago - On November 18, 2025, a federal court in El Paso, Texas ruled that the maps consisted an illegal racial gerrymander, and as a result, barred their use in the 2026 midterm elections. On November 21, the U.S.

March 3, 2026 - Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional "racial gerrymander." New York's congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot. As in this year's prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans. ... Voters and the state of New York contended it's too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York's highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now "future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court" and "be rewarded for such gamesmanship." The state argues this is an issue for "New York courts, not federal courts" to resolve, an

August 11, 2025 - Aside from these court-ordered redistricting efforts, states have not typically undergone significant redistricting efforts until after the next decennial census, though there are some recent and ongoing examples. In 2025 and 2026, lawmakers in a number of states (including California, Missouri, ...

December 11, 2025 - Looking ahead, the Court's decision in the pending case of Louisiana v. Callais will likely affect how Section 2 of the VRA is applied in the context of redistricting maps. As one legal commentator has opined, the Court in Callais may even be poised to evaluate the constitutionality of Section 2. Other issues relating to the VRA are percolating in the lower courts and might ultimately reach the Supreme Court. For example, the federal circuit courts recently considered whether private litigants or only the Department of Justice can bring enforcement suits under Section 2. In July 2025, the Supreme Court issued an administrative stay on a U.S.

August 4, 2025 - Partisan gerrymandering poses "political questions beyond the reach" of federal courts, the court ruled.

as the District Court stated more fully: “Unlike the chal­ · lengers in Alexander, who ‘provided no direct evidence of a · racial gerrymander,’ the Plaintiff Groups here have pro­ · duced substantial direct evidence indicating that race was · the predominant driver in the 2025 redistricting process.”

March 14, 2026 - State redistricting legal challenges have centered on whether new maps constitute permissible partisan gerrymandering or unconstitutional racial discrimination, with federal courts reaching different conclusions in Texas, California, and North Carolina cases.