WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday temporarily reinstated Texas Republicans' newly drawn congressional map, allowing the state to proceed with district lines that a federal appeals panel had blocked just days earlier. Justice Samuel Alito issued the administrative stay, which halts the lower court's order and permits Texas to use the redrawn map in the lead-up to the 2024 midterm elections.
The decision came swiftly after Texas officials appealed to the high court, seeking to overturn a ruling from a three-judge federal panel in San Antonio. On Tuesday, the panel, which included Judge Jeffrey Brown—a Donald Trump appointee—found that the new map, dubbed the 2025 Map, violated federal voting rights laws. In their opinion, the judges wrote that "substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map," concluding that the lines diluted the voting power of minority communities in several districts.
Under the lower court's directive, Texas would have been required to revert to the congressional map drawn in 2021, which had been in place since the last redistricting cycle. That earlier map was itself the subject of legal challenges, but the panel deemed it a fairer alternative pending further review. The ruling represented a major hurdle for Republican leaders in Texas, who control the state legislature and had pushed aggressively for the new boundaries to bolster their congressional delegation.
Alito's order, issued without dissent from the full Supreme Court, provides only temporary relief. It allows Texas to move forward with the new map while the justices consider the state's emergency application. The court directed civil rights groups that sued to block the map—including organizations like the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the League of United Latin American Citizens—to respond by 5 p.m. on Monday. This timeline is critical, as the deadline for candidates to file for Texas' March 2024 primary elections is December 8.
The redrawn map, approved by the Republican-dominated Texas Legislature earlier this year, was projected to deliver Republicans at least five additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Texas currently holds 38 congressional districts, with Republicans controlling 25 and Democrats 13 under the 2021 map. Analysts from nonpartisan groups like the Princeton Gerrymandering Project estimated that the new lines could shift the balance further in favor of the GOP, potentially helping to preserve or expand their slim majority in the House after the November 2024 elections.
This mid-decade redistricting effort in Texas emerged from a broader national partisan battle over electoral maps, typically redrawn only once every 10 years following the U.S. Census. Republicans in the state argued that population growth, particularly in urban and suburban areas, justified the changes to ensure equal representation. However, critics, including Democratic lawmakers and voting rights advocates, contended that the maps were drawn with partisan intent, packing Democratic-leaning voters into fewer districts while spreading Republican support to create safe seats elsewhere.
The federal panel's decision on Tuesday echoed concerns raised in similar lawsuits across the country. In Missouri, Republicans passed a new state legislative map in 2022 that was challenged for alleged racial gerrymandering, though it was ultimately upheld by state courts. North Carolina's GOP-controlled legislature also enacted congressional boundaries this year aimed at flipping seats from Democrats, prompting ongoing litigation that could reach the Supreme Court. These moves have fueled accusations of a coordinated Republican strategy to redraw maps in states where they hold power, even outside the standard census cycle.
Former President Donald Trump, who has remained influential in Republican politics, played a vocal role in advocating for such changes. Trump publicly urged GOP leaders in Texas to pursue aggressive redistricting, framing it as essential to counter what he called Democratic advantages in other states. The Texas ruling was seen as a setback for his efforts, with political observers noting that it could embolden challenges to Republican maps nationwide. "This is a big win for fair maps and against racial discrimination in voting," said Nina Perales, a lawyer for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, in a statement following the lower court's decision.
On the other side, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, decried the federal panel's ruling as judicial overreach. In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Paxton's office argued that the new map complied with the Voting Rights Act and reflected legitimate demographic shifts. "The district court ignored the Legislature's considered judgments," the filing stated, emphasizing that the boundaries were crafted after extensive public hearings and data analysis. Paxton has vowed to defend the map vigorously, warning that reverting to the 2021 lines would disrupt ongoing preparations for the primaries.
The Supreme Court's involvement underscores its growing role in resolving partisan redistricting disputes, a trend that intensified after its 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause, which declined to intervene in most gerrymandering cases on federal constitutional grounds. Justices have since weighed in on specific racial gerrymandering claims under the Voting Rights Act, often issuing narrow rulings to avoid broader precedents. Alito, a conservative justice, has previously sided with states in election-related stays, including during the 2020 election cycle.
Beyond Texas, the ripple effects of this case are being felt in other battleground states. In Indiana, Trump has continued to pressure Republican lawmakers to redraw congressional maps before the 2024 cycle, citing similar population changes. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice under President Joe Biden has joined a lawsuit challenging a voter-approved Democratic-drawn map in California, which passed via ballot initiative earlier this month. That map, Proposition 1, aims to create more competitive districts but has drawn Republican fire for allegedly favoring Democrats in the nation's most populous state.
Voting rights experts predict that the Texas case could set the tone for how mid-decade redistricting plays out nationally. "If the Supreme Court upholds the stay, it might encourage more states to test the limits of redistricting outside census years," said Michael Li, a senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice, in an interview with NBC News. Li noted that Texas' explosive growth—adding over 4 million residents since 2010—has made it a focal point for these debates, with Latinos now comprising nearly 40% of the population.
As the December 8 filing deadline approaches, Texas political operatives on both sides are bracing for uncertainty. Democratic candidates have already expressed frustration over the potential use of the new map, arguing it undermines voter choice. Republicans, meanwhile, view Alito's order as validation of their strategy to maximize seats in a chamber where control could determine the fate of major legislation in 2025.
The broader implications extend to the balance of power in Washington. With the House majority hanging in the balance, redistricting battles like this one could tip the scales in an already polarized Congress. As the Supreme Court deliberates, all eyes will be on whether it grants full relief to Texas or sends the case back for further review, potentially reshaping electoral maps just months before voters head to the polls.
For now, the temporary stay keeps Texas on track with its preferred boundaries, but the underlying legal fight shows no signs of abating. Civil rights groups have indicated they will press their case forcefully in their Monday response, setting the stage for what could be a protracted Supreme Court battle over the future of American democracy.