A federal court has blocked Texas from implementing its newly redrawn congressional voting maps for the 2026 midterm elections, ruling that the maps constitute an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The court ordered the state to use the district boundaries from 2021 instead, dealing a setback to Republican efforts to gain five additional seats.
The ruling was issued on Tuesday by a three-judge panel in El Paso, which voted 2-1 in favor of blocking the maps. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, appointed by former President Trump, authored the majority opinion, stating that substantial evidence indicated race was the predominant factor in the redistricting process. The court found that plaintiffs, including voting rights groups, were likely to prove the 2025 map violated the 14th Amendment by engaging in racial gerrymandering.
Judge Brown emphasized that while politics played a role, the legislature appeared to have set and followed racial targets, particularly after the Justice Department directed Texas to rectify districts deemed problematic. In a 160-page decision, he noted that the state was effectively imposed with a 50% racial target for creating majority-Hispanic and majority-Black districts, which overstepped constitutional bounds. The court rejected the state’s argument that the redrawing was solely based on partisanship.
The redistricting effort began after the Justice Department sent a letter in July alleging that four Democratic-held districts in the 2021 map were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. Governor Greg Abbott responded by adding redistricting to a special session agenda, leading to the approval of a new map in August that aimed to address these concerns but instead created five Republican-leaning districts. This move was part of a broader strategy to bolster the GOP’s narrow majority in the House.
Republicans argued that the redrawing reflected conservative voting preferences, but the court disagreed. Governor Abbott condemned the ruling as “clearly erroneous” and announced an appeal to the Supreme Court, asserting that it undermines legislative authority. He stated that any claim of discrimination was “absurd and unsupported” by testimony from ten days of hearings.
Conversely, Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu praised the decision, calling it a victory against “one of the most brazen attempts to steal our democracy that Texas has ever seen.” He accused Abbott and Republicans of trying to silence Texans’ voices to placate Donald Trump, who had urged the mid-decade redistricting. This case highlights the intense partisan divisions over electoral boundaries.
The ruling is part of a wider national redistricting battle, with states like California, Utah, Missouri, and North Carolina also adjusting their maps for political advantage. In California, voters recently approved a measure to redraw districts in favor of Democrats, while a Utah judge rejected a Republican-drawn map. These actions underscore the high stakes for control of Congress in the 2026 elections.
The timing of the ruling is critical, as the candidate-filing deadline for the 2026 elections is December 8. The court deemed it necessary to act now to prevent voters from being sorted by race, ensuring free and fair elections. Judges rejected concerns about disruption, emphasizing that constitutional protections must prevail over procedural delays.
Looking ahead, the appeal to the Supreme Court could overturn or uphold the decision, with significant implications for the 2026 midterms and the balance of power in the House. Republicans currently hold a narrow majority, and the loss of potential seats in Texas could impact their ability to maintain control. This ruling sets a precedent for how courts handle mid-decade redistricting and racial gerrymandering claims in the future.
