US Supreme Court reinstates Texas voting map favoring Republicans

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday reinstated a revised Texas congressional map intended to strengthen Republican representation in the House, offering a significant boost to President Donald Trumps effort to preserve his partys control in the 2026 midterm elections.

The decision overturns a lower court ruling that had barred the state from implementing the map, which was expected to shift up to five House seats from Democratic to Republican control. The lower court had determined that the redistricting plan likely violated constitutional protections by discriminating on the basis of race.

With Republicans currently holding narrow majorities in both chambers, losing control of either the House or Senate in November 2026 could hinder Trumps legislative objectives and potentially open the door to Democrat-led investigations.

The ruling arrives amid nationwide clashes in states run by both parties over efforts to redraw district lines in ways that adjust the demographic makeup of congressional districts for political advantage. Justice Samuel Alito previously issued a temporary stay on November 21 while the Supreme Court considered how to proceed.

Redistricting, the process of redefining district boundaries, has long been the subject of legal battles, particularly concerning gerrymandering. While the Supreme Court in 2019 ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims are not reviewable in federal courts, redistricting driven primarily by racial motives remains unconstitutional under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.

Texas Republican lawmakers have acknowledged that the map was crafted following Trumps request to pursue partisan gains in House races. However, the El Paso-based lower court ruled 2-1 on November 18 that the map likely amounted to an unlawful racial gerrymander, siding with civil rights organizations challenging the plan.

Texas currently holds 38 House seats, with Republicans occupying 25 of them. The disputed map was approved by the Republican-controlled legislature and signed by Governor Greg Abbott in August.

In the lower courts opinion, Judge Jeffrey Brown wrote that federal officials had pushed Texas to factor race into what the state claimed was a race-neutral process. Brown argued that the Justice Department acted on a flawed legal premise when asserting that several districts in the previous map required redrawing due to racial imbalance. He noted that the letter from the department focused solely on racial demographics rather than partisan concerns.

The NAACP highlighted after the ruling that although white residents account for only 40 percent of Texas population, they hold more than 73 percent of the states congressional representation. The court ordered Texas to use its earlier map, approved in 2021, for the 2026 elections.

Judge Jerry Smith dissented, criticizing the majoritys reasoning and arguing that the decision harmed both Texans and the integrity of the legal system.

The case marks another challenge in Trumps broader effort to reshape electoral boundaries. Similar redistricting conflicts have recently emerged in states such as Indiana and California, where political leaders have taken opposing approaches to redrawing House districts.

Redistricting typically follows population shifts recorded by the decennial census, though current disputes have been driven largely by partisan considerations. The Supreme Court, which maintains a 6-3 conservative majority, has already heard arguments this term in another significant redistricting case involving race and Louisianas House districts.

Author: Olivia Parker