Supreme Court approves Texas to use Republican-friendly congressional map in 2026

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday authorized Texas to proceed with its 2026 elections under a congressional district map designed to benefit Republicans and advanced with the support of former President Donald Trump. The decision overrides a lower-court ruling that found the map was likely unconstitutional due to racial discrimination.

Texas had asked the Court for urgent intervention because candidate filing has already begun and primary elections are scheduled for March. The justices agreed, placing the lower courts 21 decision on hold until the Supreme Court issues a final ruling. Justice Samuel Alito had earlier instituted a temporary pause while the Court reviewed Texas appeal.

The ruling follows the Courts previous actions blocking lower-court decisions on redistricting in other states, including Alabama and Louisiana, in the months leading up to elections.

The Texas map, approved last summer at Trumps urging, was structured to create five additional Republican seats in the U.S. House. The move, intended to help secure a narrow GOP majority, prompted a wave of redistricting battles across the country. Missouri and North Carolina later adopted maps that added one Republican seat each, while California voters approved a measure designed to expand Democratic representation by five seats.

Legal challenges against the revised maps are underway in California and Missouri. A three-judge panel has permitted North Carolinas new map to stand for the 2026 cycle. While the Trump administration is suing to overturn Californias redistricting plan, it urged the Supreme Court to leave the Texas map in place during litigation.

The justices are also considering a separate Louisiana case that could further restrict the use of race in drawing districts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, with potential nationwide implications for the current redistricting cycle.

In Texas, U.S. District Judges Jeffrey V. Brown and David Guaderrama determined that the map likely weakens the electoral influence of Black and Latino voters, violating constitutional protections. Brown was appointed by Trump, while Guaderrama was appointed by President Barack Obama.

Brown wrote that political considerations were involved in creating the map but emphasized that the evidence pointed to deliberate racial gerrymandering. Judge Jerry Smith, who dissented, strongly criticized both the process and the findings, rejecting the majoritys conclusions and arguing that the decision harms Texas residents and undermines the rule of law.

Author: Aiden Foster