Texas just hit a judicial roadblock in its bid to reshape congressional districts for the 2026 midterms.
A panel of three federal judges, with a 2-1 ruling on Tuesday, struck down a Republican-drawn map, calling it an apparent race-based gerrymander designed to snag extra seats, forcing lawmakers back to the 2021 boundaries after a nearly two-week trial in El Paso, as Fox News reports.
This saga started when Texas Republicans, riding the wave of a broader push by President Donald Trump and allies, redrew five districts to tilt the scales in their favor for the upcoming midterms.
The majority opinion, penned by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey V. Brown (a Trump appointee) and backed by Judge David Guaderrama (an Obama appointee), didn’t mince words about the evidence of racial gerrymandering.
Judge Jerry Smith (a Reagan appointee), however, dissented silently, leaving us to wonder if he saw a different map or just a different principle at stake.
This ruling isn’t just a Texas-sized headache—it’s a direct jab at Republican efforts to pad their slim House majority, especially with Trump’s team pushing mid-decade redistricting in states like Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio.
Texas isn’t alone; Florida and Kansas are mulling similar map tweaks, all part of a strategy to avoid a repeat of the 2018 midterm debacle when Democrats flipped the House.
Historically, the party in power often stumbles during midterms—think 2010, when Republicans roared back to dominance—and Trump’s camp clearly wants to rewrite that script.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton isn’t taking this lying down, vowing to appeal to the Supreme Court and seek an emergency stay to pause the lower court’s smackdown.
Paxton griped, “For years, Democrats have engaged in partisan redistricting intended to eliminate Republican representation. But when Republicans respond in kind, Democrats rely on false accusations of racism to secure a partisan advantage,” showing the raw frustration on the GOP side.
Let’s be real—both parties play hardball with maps, but crying foul only when you’re on the losing end smells more like politics than principle.
On the flip side, DNC Chair Ken Martin cheered, “Texas Democrats and the DNC fought valiantly for fair representation, and now, with this decision, the court has ruled that Texas Republicans cannot implement this blatant gerrymander in the next election.”
Democrats patting themselves on the back might want to check history—didn’t they break quorum for two weeks earlier this year to stall this very bill? Hardly the moral high ground when you’re dodging votes.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court looms large, already wrestling with race and redistricting in Louisiana v. Callais, with hints they might soften Voting Rights Act protections against diluting minority votes—though no ruling is set yet.
Whether they’ll take Paxton’s appeal or grant his stay is anyone’s guess, but Texas’s map fight is far from over, and it’s a safe bet both sides will keep swinging until the last gavel drops.
