The battle over new congressional maps ahead of November’s midterm elections has heated up as primary elections rapidly approach, with various court rulings blocking and approving new maps.
The mid-decade redistricting battle began when Texas, pushed by President Donald Trump, decided to redraw its congressional map to net Republicans up to five House seats, and has been followed by efforts in both Democrat and Republican-led states. As more of the efforts face legal challenges, courts could indirectly dictate who controls the House of Representatives next year based on which hyper-partisan maps are allowed to be installed ahead of midterm elections.
Texas and California’s maps given green light by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has been asked to weigh in on whether to allow two of the most controversial maps of the current mid-decade cycle, allowing both to be used for the November elections.
In November 2025, a panel of three federal judges halted Texas’s use of a congressional map, which would have allowed the GOP to flip up to five Democrat-held seats, alleging it was an unlawful racial gerrymander.
The 2-1 ruling included a blistering dissent from U.S. Circuit Judge Jerry Smith, who called the decision “the most blatant exercise of judicial activism that I have ever witnessed.” Smith also said it was “replete with legal and factual error, and accompanied by naked procedural abuse,” which demanded reversal by the Supreme Court.
Texas appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket, with the high court ruling 6-3 in December 2025 to allow the Lone Star State to use the new congressional map for the 2026 elections. The majority on the high court found the lower court had made “at least two serious errors” in its ruling and found the lower panel violated the current normal rule of not altering “the election rules on the eve of an election.”
California Democrats, looking to negate the GOP’s gains with the Texas map, brought forward a new congressional map for the Golden State, which would give Democrats a net gain of five House seats. Voters in California passed the new map in November 2025, but the California GOP filed a lawsuit alleging it was an unlawful gerrymander.
A panel of federal judges denied the California GOP’s request to halt the use of the new congressional map, leading them to appeal to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket. The high court issued a brief order earlier this week denying the California Republican Party’s efforts to halt California’s new congressional map.
With the Texas map set to allow the GOP to gain up to five seats in the House and the California map set to allow Democrats to gain up to five seats, the partisan gains essentially cancel each other out.
Virginia’s redistricting held up by court ruling
Democrats in Virginia, emboldened by victories in last year’s elections, pushed forward with their own redistricting plan to gain more seats in the House of Representatives for the 2026 elections.
Earlier this week, Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) signed into law legislation that would call a special election on April 21, with voters deciding whether to allow a redraw of the commonwealth’s congressional map to net Democrats four House seats. While the measure has been signed into law, the referendum may not proceed as it faces a challenge in court.
Judge Jack Hurley of the Tazewell County Circuit Court ruled late last month that the Democrat-led state legislature failed to follow multiple procedures required to place the redistricting measure on the ballot. The ruling states that the earliest a redistricting referendum could happen under the proper procedure is 2028.
Virginia Democrats appealed the ruling, with the commonwealth’s Supreme Court expected to either allow the referendum to go forward or uphold the lower court’s ruling. The timeline for a ruling will have to be quick because of the state’s required 45-day early voting period, which would begin on March 7 for the April 21 referendum.
Neighboring Maryland is also attempting to draw a more Democrat-friendly map, but any effort to do so could face pushback from the state’s Supreme Court, which has a majority of judges appointed by former GOP Gov. Larry Hogan. When Democrats attempted to install a map drawing out the lone Republican congressman from the Old Line State during the initial redistricting period this decade, the state’s high court struck it down, resulting in the current map that maintains the lone GOP seat.
Renewed efforts to push a map favored by Gov. Wes Moore (D-MD) and other Democrats, to redraw the map to net Democrats a House seat, passed the state House earlier this week, but it faces stiff resistance from Democratic state Senate President Bill Ferguson.
Some states await Supreme Court’s VRA case to explore options
The Supreme Court will issue a ruling that could have sweeping effects over the fate of race-based redistricting challenges, with Louisiana v. Callais. The high court appeared skeptical of so-called Voting Rights Act “opportunity districts,” which create minority-majority congressional districts, typically giving Democrats an extra House seat or two because of the party’s dominance with minority voters.
If the Supreme Court strikes down Louisiana’s second black-majority congressional district, and also strikes down VRA opportunity districts, it could have ramifications for other states and endanger as many as 19 Democratic congressional seats, according to the left-wing group Fair Fight Action.
While Louisiana lawmakers have said there is likely not enough time to redraw their map before key election deadlines for the midterm elections because the Supreme Court has yet to rule, other states have said they will redistrict once the high court issues its ruling.
In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) called a special session of the Sunshine State’s legislature for April with the goal of redistricting to add GOP seats.
While no proposed maps have been put forward by Republicans in Florida yet, the Fair Fight Action analysis found that three Democrat-held seats in the Sunshine State are VRA opportunity districts that would be endangered by the Supreme Court’s forthcoming Callais ruling.
SUPREME COURT ALLOWS CALIFORNIA TO USE DEMOCRAT-FRIENDLY CONGRESSIONAL MAP FOR 2026
While the special session is still two months away, it is already facing legal challenges from left-wing groups. The National Redistricting Foundation filed a lawsuit on behalf of two Florida voters alleging DeSantis’s attempt to redistrict the state mid-decade via a special session is unlawful.
The earliest the Supreme Court could rule on Louisiana v. Callais is likely Feb. 20, while the latest the high court could rule is the end of June. While the decision in the case remains pending, state maps for the 2026 elections will be solidified over the coming months as candidate filing deadlines rapidly approach.