SCOTUS allows California to use new congressional map, counter Texas’ GOP gerrymander

In a major win for voters, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed California to use its new, voter-approved congressional map in the 2026 election. The decision clears the way for Democrats to counter President Donald Trump’s redistricting gains in Texas. 

The court denied an attempt* by the California GOP to block the new congressional map, which Republicans argued was an illegal racial gerrymander. The justices issued no opinion with the order.

Under the new map, Democrats could pick up five more seats in Congress. Previously, Texas redrew its congressional map at Trump’s behest, which could give Republicans five more seats from the Lone Star State.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) celebrated the court win in a social media post Wednesday. 

“Donald Trump said he was ‘entitled’ to five more congressional seats in Texas. He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he’ll lose again in November,” Newsom wrote.

Republicans had appealed the case to the Supreme Court after a federal court ruled against their challenge last month.

The Supreme Court’s decision is a resounding victory for voters. 

Since June, Trump has called for GOP-controlled states to redraw their congressional maps in an attempt to artificially tilt the 2026 midterm elections in Republicans’ favor — and, by extension, weaken the power of voters who support Democrats.

In three states — Texas, North Carolina, and Missouri — the Republican-controlled legislatures sprang into action and quickly passed new congressional maps.

Soon, California began the process of redrawing its map — a move expressly aimed at countering GOP advantage in Texas. But unlike the Texas map, which was passed by partisan lawmakers without voter approval, California law required the state to have the support of voters to redistrict. 

“We’re working through a very transparent, temporary and very public process,” Newsom said in August. “We’re putting the maps on the ballot and we’re giving the power to the people.” 

In November, California held a referendum on implementing its own redistricting plan, which voters overwhelmingly approved. 

Republicans then moved swiftly to block the California referendum in a lawsuit filed by the Dhillon Law Group, a firm founded by Harmeet Dhillon, who now leads the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)’s civil rights division.

The DOJ also intervened in the California redistricting case, seeking to block the map. Dhillon recused herself.

The Texas gerrymander has also faced a court battle. A federal court initially blocked the state’s new map, finding it was likely an illegal racial gerrymander.

But the Supreme Court majority reversed that decision, handing Trump and Texas Republicans a major victory. In its Texas ruling, the court majority also signaled how it would likely rule in the California case.

“Texas adopted the first new map, then California responded with its own map for the stated purpose of counteracting what Texas had done,” the court wrote. “The impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.”

Racial gerrymanders are against the law, but partisan ones have been considered legal by federal courts since a 2019 ruling by the Supreme Court. 

Republicans have filed seven lawsuits attempting to derail California’s attempt to counteract GOP gerrymanders. All of them have been unsuccessful. 

*Intervening defendants are represented in the lawsuit by the Elias Law Group (ELG). ELG Chair Marc Elias is the founder of Democracy Docket.