Well, that didn’t take long. Just over two weeks ago a trio of judges ruled 2-1 that Texas could not use newly drawn congressional maps in the 2026 midterms. The state had argued that it was motivated by partisan interest in redrawing the map, which the Supreme Court has said is legal. But two of the judges decided that Texas had an illegal intent to racially gerrymander the state.
“To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 map,” the judges said. “But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 map.”
As I noted at the time, there was a unique judicial process for voting rights lawsuits which meant this case could only be appealed to the Supreme Court. Today, the court ruled in favor of Texas, meaning the new maps are back in for the midterms.
The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Texas to use a new congressional district map in next year’s midterm election that was drawn to maximize Republican political power.
Granting an emergency application filed by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, the conservative majority paused a lower court ruling that said the map was unlawful because Republican lawmakers, at the direction of the Trump administration, explicitly considered race when drawing new districts.
The unsigned order said that Texas is “likely to succeed on the merits of its claim,” including that the lower court “failed to honor the presumption of legislative good faith” when assessing the state legislature’s motives.
CNN has more on the split in the decision:
Justice Samuel Alito, a member of the court’s conservative wing, wrote that it was “indisputable” that the “impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.” His opinion was joined by two other conservatives, Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.
Alito’s point was significant because, if the redistricting was solely based on politics, then federal courts would have no jurisdiction to hear the case.
In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the decision “disserves the millions of Texans whom the District Court found were assigned to their new districts based on their race.”
“The majority today loses sight of its proper role,” Kagan wrote, asserting that the Supreme Court should have reviewed the lower court’s decision for “clear error,” which she said was never established.
The majority can reach the result it does – overturning the District Court’s finding of racial line-drawing, even if to achieve partisan goals – only by arrogating to itself that court’s rightful function. We know better, the majority declares today. I cannot think of a reason why.”
The other two liberal Justices joined Kagan’s dissent. So this was effectively 6-3. The dissent goes on for 17 pages. You can read it all here. Kagan’s basic argument is that SCOTUS had no right to insert its own judgment for the careful fact-finding of the three judge panel. She spends a lot of time arguing that the author of that decision carefully weighted the evidence.
Kagan’s dissent is quite at odds with the lone dissent in the lower court’s case. As I described here, Circuit Court Judge Jerry E. Smith wrote a roughly 100-page dissent calling the majority opinion “the most blatant exercise of judicial activism that I have ever witnessed.” He also wrote this, mocking the 160-page majority decision which was issued before he was able to read it in its final form:
Judge Brown could have saved himself and the readers a lot of time and effort by merely stating the following:
I just don’t like what the Legislature did here. It was unnecessary, and it seems unfair to disadvantaged voters. I need to step in to make sure wiser heads prevail over the nakedly partisan and racially questionable actions of these zealous lawmakers. Just as I did to the lawmakers in Galveston County in Petteway, I’m using my considerable clout as a federal district judge to put a stop to bad policy judgments. After all, I get paid to do what I think is right.
The bottom line is that the new Texas maps are back in and Democrats’ hopes that this effort had backfired on Republicans are at an end.
Of course that doesn’t mean Republicans will retain the House during the midterms, there are still too many other factors at play. But it does mean they have a chance to play the same game that blue states have been playing for a long time.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Hot Air’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Hot Air VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
