🔗 Share this article

Through a unsigned order, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted Texas to employ a redrawn congressional map that could add up to five new conservative-tilting districts. The six-to-three decision, issued on Thursday, approves a petition by the state to lift a federal judge's ruling that had struck down the new map in November.

Justices' Rationale

The district court wrongly interjected itself into an ongoing primary campaign, generating considerable confusion and upsetting the sensitive balance of power in elections, the supreme court said in explaining its action.

That lower court had earlier ruled that Texas had probably classified voters by their race – a practice known as racial gerrymandering – when it passed the boundaries. It had ordered the state to employ the maps created after the most recent national count for the forthcoming election.

Stinging Dissenting Opinion

With a strongly worded dissent, Justice Elena Kagan took issue with the court's ruling. She contended that it disregarded the work of the district court, observing that its decision was written by a judge nominated by ex-President Donald Trump.

We are a higher court than the district court, but we are not a better one when it comes to making such a fact-based decision, Kagan wrote in a opinion joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She continued, This court's stay ensures that Texas's new map, with all its boosted political tilt, will control next year's elections. And it guarantees that many Texas residents, for no good reason, will be placed in electoral districts due to their race. And that result, as this court has pronounced year in and year out, is a breach of the law of the land.

Countrywide Map-Drawing Fight

The ruling occurs during a national contest over the remapping of electoral maps. Texas is an essential part in efforts to alter the U.S. House map to bolster a fragile Republican control. Ordinarily, map-drawing happens after a new decade's census. Yet the move by Texas Republicans to proceed with a aggressive mid-cycle redistricting earlier this year sparked a chain reaction among other states.

GOP lawmakers in states like North Carolina and Missouri have also enacted new maps that could add a number of more conservative seats. Democratic lawmakers, in response, have countered with revised boundaries in states like California and Virginia, which could offset those projected gains.

Partisan Responses

Lone Star State top lawyer praised the supreme court ruling. In a statement, he said the order defended Texas's basic authority to draw a map that ensures representation supportive of his party. We are setting the precedent for restoring our country, through each electoral district and individual state, he remarked.

In contrast, opposition party representatives criticized the outcome. It is deeply disheartening that the Court has endorsed this severely racially gerrymandered plan from Texas Republicans, said the leader of a major Democratic campaign committee.

A leading House figure argued the court had yet again eroded its legitimacy by rubber-stamping a race-based map. The ruling demonstrates a willingness to subvert democracy. This Texas plan is a partisan, racially biased scheme to undermine voter will, especially in communities of color, he added.