Indiana Senate Republicans say they do not have votes to pass mid-cycle redistricting despite a pressure campaign from the White House, according to a spokesperson for Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray – but President Donald Trump’s allies are still demanding the matter comes up for a vote in a special session.
Tag Archives: gerrymandering
“The latest redistricting salvo: North Carolina gerrymanders out House Democrat”
POLITICO:
North Carolina Republicans passed a new congressional map Wednesday that will likely give the GOP one more red-leaning seat in next year’s midterms, the latest in a string of White House-backed redistricting efforts….
The new map primarily affects Rep. Don Davis (D-N.C.). President Donald Trump narrowly carried his district in 2024, and the new district would have voted for Trump by roughly 11 percentage points….
Even before this redraw, North Carolina had one of the most GOP-friendly gerrymanders in the nation, with the current delegation split between 10 Republicans and four Democrats despite the battleground nature of statewide elections. Davis represents the only true swing district on the map.
Democratic Gov. Josh Stein has no power to veto the maps — due in part to a deal brokered by state Democrats in the 1990s that exempted redistricting from the governor’s powers.
“’Democracy is worth fighting for’: Obama rallies California redistricting supporters”
SACRAMENTO, California — Barack Obama joined Gavin Newsom to rally supporters of California Democrats’ congressional redistricting ballot measure as the Nov. 4 special election nears.
The former president during a Wednesday call with volunteers painted Proposition 50 — a bid to change California’s congressional lines mid-cycle and pick up five Democratic House seats next year — in stark terms.
“There’s a broader principle at stake that has to do with whether or not our democracy can be manipulated by those who are already in power to entrench themselves further,” he said. “Or whether we’re going to have a system that allows the people to decide who’s going to represent them.”
“A little-noticed consequence of mid-decade redistricting”
Almanac of American Politics with Louis Jacobson Substack:
With 10 states — and maybe more — looking to redraw their House districts this year or early next year, the balance of Congress might look very different by the time the 2026 elections are settled.
Something else that could look different? The membership of Congress’ most influential committees.
Why? A notably large number of the incumbents at risk from mid-decade redistricting serve on the most important committees, including Appropriations, Energy & Commerce, Financial Services, Transportation & Infrastructure, and Agriculture.
Of the 26 incumbents most at risk from redistricting, 21 — about 81% — hold a seat on at least one of these five key committees.
Thurs & Fri: Univ. of Penn Law Review Multiracial Democracy Symposium
You can register for and get more info on the symposium here.
In light of recent attacks on multiracial democracy, I’m honored to co-organize The Future of Law & Multiracial Democracy Symposium this upcoming Thursday and Friday (October 23-24) in Philadelphia at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.
We’ll hear from leading thinkers on voting rights, including Guy-Uriel Charles, Torey Dolan, Tabatha Abu El-Haj, Nathan Fleming, Damon Hewitt, Ellen Katz, and Michael Morse.
We’ll also hear from many top scholars in other areas shaping our multiracial democracy, including technology, courts, history and culture, immigration, civil rights, and Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (the full agenda and list of scholars is here).
The articles from the symposium will be published by the University of Pennsylvania Law Review in 2026.
“Trump Pushes Indiana Lawmakers to Redraw State Maps”
NYT:
President Trump called Republicans in the Indiana Senate on Friday morning to encourage them to redraw the state’s congressional maps to benefit Republicans ahead of the midterm elections, according to three people familiar with the call.
Mr. Trump asked the state lawmakers to support a new map that would eliminate the state’s two Democratic districts and give Republicans all nine congressional seats, the people said.
The call is part of an escalating White House pressure campaign on Republican-led states to redraw congressional maps to help the Trump administration retain control of the U.S. House in the midterm elections next year.
“Trump Considers Overhaul of Refugee System That Would Favor White People”
NYT:
The Trump administration is considering a radical overhaul of the U.S. refugee system that would slash the program to its bare bones while giving preference to English speakers, white South Africans and Europeans who oppose migration, according to documents obtained by The New York Times.
“Parties Brace for a Political Future Without the Voting Rights Act”
After the Supreme Court appeared ready to dismantle one of the remaining provisions of the Voting Rights Act, Democrats and Republicans began to reckon with a political future that could see the balance of power in Congress tip decisively toward the G.O.P. and lead to further entrenchment and polarization in states across the country.
“Where the Voting Rights Act stands after the Supreme Court punts on a Louisiana case”
Hansi Lo Wang, looking ahead for NPR.
“Signatures certified: Ohio anti-gerrymandering amendment on its way to November ballot”
A proposed anti-gerrymandering amendment in Ohio that would remove politicians from the redistricting process in favor of a citizens commission has gathered enough signatures to proceed to voters on the November ballot.
“Wisconsin Supreme Court orders new legislative maps in redistricting case brought by Democrats”
MADISON, Wis. — The liberal-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned Republican-drawn legislative maps on Friday and ordered that new district boundary lines be drawn as Democrats had urged in a redistricting case they hope will weaken GOP majorities.
The ruling comes less than a year before the 2024 election in a battleground state where four of the six past presidential elections have been decided by fewer than 23,000 votes, and Republicans have built large majorities in the Legislature under maps they drew over a decade ago.
The court ruled 4-3 in favor of Democrats who argued that the legislative maps are unconstitutional because districts drawn aren’t contiguous. New maps are likely to be unveiled in about two months.
“‘We Have a Right to Put It on the Ballot’: How Organizers Are Defending Direct Democracy”
Bolts Magazine. I see this story as relevant to a basic question that I think is going to confront the field of election law (and, more broadly, the law of democratic procedures) over the next decade or so: the extent to which decisions should be made on the basis of majority rule. Watching the fight over Issue 1 unfold in Ohio, I became convinced of the importance of preserving the right of the citizenry to control the machinery of their self-government by means of a majority vote. I recognize that there have been arguments in favor of a supermajority requirement for constitutional change, but on balance I think the risk of “minority rule” through a supermajority requirement is greater than the risk of an oppressive majority. Certainly, it would have been a serious problem for self-government in Ohio if Issue 1 had prevailed in raising the threshold for constitutional change to 60%. That would have made it extremely difficult to adopt new anti-gerrymandering reform, for example, to redress the way that incumbent politicians managed to negate the efficacy of the previous anti-gerrymandering reforms in the state during the last decade.
House Hardball, part 2
Nick Stephanopoulos makes some fair points in response to my post on whether, in the absence of a new Act of Congress, the House can or should refuse to seat winning candidates solely on the ground that their districts were gerrymandered by state law. I remain extremely dubious about the idea based on rule-of-law or electoral democracy values, but I don’t want to get into an extended debate on those issues here. Rather, I want only to follow up a bit more on whether this hardball tactic would even work according to its own objectives. In doing this, I hope to keep an open mind on the point and be willing to consider new information and analysis. I invite others, especially those with expertise in House procedure, to weigh in. Meanwhile, here’s how I see this issue.
Continue reading House Hardball, part 2