For over a month, the Democracy Docket team vigilantly awaited the ruling in the Texas gerrymandering case*, ready to publish at a moment’s notice so we could get the news to you immediately. And on Tuesday afternoon, our Research team sent us the ruling. Texas' gerrymander had been blocked. The vibes in the office were a bit like Mission Control watching the lunar landing — if Apollo 11 were set to land in the Supreme Court (SCOTUS).
Judge Jeffrey Brown ordered Texas to use its previous 2021 map in 2026, dealing a major blow to President Donald Trump’s national effort to rig congressional maps for the upcoming midterms.
To be honest, we’re still processing the ruling – a 160-page unequivocal rejection of Texas’ gerrymander, written by a judge whom Trump nominated to the federal bench in 2019. Brown was joined by Judge David Guaderrama, an appointee of President Barack Obama. Judge Jerry Smith, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, dissented (rather dramatically, as it turned out).
Brown’s scathing opinion wasn’t actually unexpected. As Democracy Docket readers already know from our daily court coverage, during the nine-day hearing in El Paso he asked questions that indicated his skepticism of Republicans’ argument that the gerrymander was motivated only by partisanship, not race.
Smith’s unhinged dissent, however, was not expected. His 104-page rant (packed with personal insults, his own communications with Brown, and numerous references to George Soros) came as a shock to most people accustomed to reading well-reasoned legal dissents.
Texas will begin the process of asking SCOTUS for a stay. And while the court has not yet said whether it will take up the case or allow the lower court’s injunction to stand, what happens next will help determine the fate of democracy in Texas and nationwide.
Beyond the Lone Star State, this week provided little rest for redistricting observers. The day after federal judges blocked the Texas map, North Carolina’s GOP gerrymander had its own day in court. On Wednesday, a three-judge panel heard a case* brought by minority voters and voting advocates challenging the state’s new congressional map as a racial gerrymander. Opponents are calling the map – which dismantles a historically Black congressional district – “blatant discrimination.” The court faces a tight timeline to decide the case – possibly by Dec. 1 – because 2026 election dates are just around the corner.
All in all, it was a huge week for the national redistricting battle. Read more about the Texas ruling here.
*The Elias Law Group (ELG) represents plaintiffs in the Texas and North Carolina cases. ELG Firm Chair Marc Elias is the founder of Democracy Docket.
