Previously Published in The Messenger
Since the nationwide redistricting “arms race” kicked off in earnest in August, we’ve spared no expense in covering it almost weekly in our This Week Today column on Page 9. Updates have been as numerous as they have been significant.
We’ve also stated on the Editorial page several times that a Pandora’s Box has been opened and we disagree vehemently with President Donald Trump’s (R-FL) pursuit of these mid-decade map shuffles.
For broader context, mid-decade redistricting is incredibly rare, often only reserved for court-ordered redraws under rulings of racial and/or partisan gerrymandering. No two-year election cycle has seen as much off-schedule redistricting in nearly fifty years.
The Donkey or the Elephant?
The biggest question as it pertains to gerrymandering is who started it? In terms of the current battle, the Texas GOP easily earns that distinction. Republicans point to gerrymandered maps in Illinois, New Mexico, Oregon, and Nevada – with Illinois’ being perhaps the most egregiously drawn map in the country – as well as attempts that were defeated in New York and Maryland. These maps were officiated or attempted with the regular redistricting cycle in 2021.
Meanwhile, Republicans carved up several states of their own that year, with Texas, North Carolina, and Florida being the most disadvantageous for Democrats in multiple seats, while Kentucky, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Utah took one seat each off the competitive table. Republicans tried a tough map in Kansas, but it failed in ousting their lone Democratic member of the House delegations – Congresswoman Sharice Davids (D, KS-03), who is a strong contender for the 2026 Senate election in the Sunflower State.
But gerrymandering is as old as the republic itself, with Anti-Federalists making the first recorded, brazen attempt to lock James Madison from winning a seat in Virginia in 1788. The term was coined in 1812 when Democratic-Republicans carved up Massachusetts’ seats.
So, who came first, the donkey or the elephant?
The answer is both – and neither, at least in terms of broader modern politics. It’s a joint effort perpetuated by creative cartography, political revenge against dissidents and partisan opposites, and subversion of the electorate’s moods heading into an election.
Where is the Redistricting Arms Race at Now?
As of press time, Republicans are staring at a net gain of seven to nine seats – one seat in South Texas and one in Ohio are likely to flip under these lines, although the incumbents should not be counted out.
Democrats are looking at a likely pickup of four in California and one in Utah.
The map above shows the current delegations, with those aforementioned flips highlighted in respective party colors. The solid color seats indicate their current incumbents, not a gauge of which seats are competitive or could flip without a gerrymander in place. The pink-colored seats show possible pickups for the GOP – the aforementioned Texas and Ohio districts.
Roadblocks and Hurdles
Both parties are seeing some setbacks in the national spring, with Republicans in Indiana defying Trump’s pressures to axe two Democratic seats.
We approve of those lawmakers standing on that principle. While a Republican House majority is certainly tantamount to Trump passing the rest of his agenda for the latter half of his second and final term, we don’t think shuffling the maps mid-decade is the way to go.
In Kansas, Republicans aren’t pushing for a special session, but will likely tackle redistricting in January during the regular session. News of redistricting has gone quiet in South Carolina, where Republicans control all but one of the Palmetto State’s seven seats. Meanwhile, Governor Ron DeSantis (R) is teasing a brutal redraw in Florida that could knock out up to five Democrats.
In New York, Governor Kathy Hochul (D) was one of the first Democratic governors to tease redistricting in response to Texas, but the initiative faces hurdles that will prevent a new map from being on the ballot until 2028.
In Maryland, Governor Wes Moore (D) is adamant on drawing out the Old Line State’s sole Republican member, but some prominent Annapolis Democrats are standing on the same principle as the Indianapolis lawmakers.
At this point, Republicans have more states to carve up than Democrats do. Some Republicans say, to this point, that it only gives them more power to gerrymander their states as Democrats effectively cleared their bench with brutal maps during the regular cycle in 2021. It would also take wildly creative mapmaking in Washington, Illinois, and Maryland for Democrats to pick up more seats, but with the increased chance of a judicial strike down.
The Bubble Set to Burst
The biggest question is if these approved maps survive judicial scrutiny. Significant lawsuits have been mounted and petitions to get the maps on their respective state ballots next year are circulating. These types of lawsuits often take months to years to settle, meaning some of these maps might survive in time for 2026, but there’s a good chance that some don’t. In that case, the GOP will not only have egg on their face, but only stand to see a starker net loss of seats if California’s map stands by next November.
Even if the maps somehow survive, this opens the door for whichever party occupies the White House to put pressure on their party’s states to ensure better odds in their next midterm. The precedent set isn’t worth the legislative gains, we believe.
We can’t support it in good conscience, not only for the sake of precedent, but because the marketplace of ideas is drowned out by lines not representative of the states they seek to encompass.
The bubble is set to burst, and we anticipate it will blow up in Trump and the GOP’s faces, while Democrats might get the last laugh in California, as their map was passed by a voter referendum. It doesn’t insulate it from being overturned by a court, but we imagine that litigation could take longer than in the Republican states where maps were passed on party lines without a public vote.