Across the United States, the battle over congressional redistricting is heating up, with California and Texas standing at the center of a growing national storm. The past few weeks have seen a flurry of legislative maneuvers, legal challenges, and high-profile endorsements, as both parties race to shape the political landscape ahead of the pivotal 2026 midterm elections.
In California, the conflict erupted on September 3, 2025, when Republicans and anti-gerrymandering groups launched a vigorous campaign to defeat Governor Gavin Newsom’s controversial redistricting plan. According to CalMatters, this move came just days after Republican legislators filed their second lawsuit in a week against the Newsom administration, seeking to halt what they call an unconstitutional ballot question. The core of their grievance? Newsom’s proposal would temporarily suspend the state’s independent redistricting commission—a body established by voters in 2010 to curb partisan gerrymandering—and replace it with maps drawn to favor Democrats.
Republican resistance has been swift and multifaceted. Printed pamphlets denouncing the plan began arriving in Californians’ mailboxes on August 28, 2025, funded by Republican operatives and good governance advocates. One four-page mailer, bankrolled by Charles T. Munger Jr., the main financial backer of the original commission, declared, “We cannot save democracy by burning it down in California.” Another, from an organization led by former state GOP chair Jessica Millan Patterson, warned of a “political power grab” and urged voters to “SAY NO” to “unconstitutional gerrymandering.”
Yet, the controversy has not remained confined to the Golden State. The redistricting fight in California is just one front in a broader, tit-for-tat battle that began in Texas and now threatens to sweep across the country. On September 3, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a new congressional map targeting five Democrat-held seats for the 2026 midterms, a move that has sent shockwaves through both parties. As reported by Roll Call, states like Ohio, Utah, Illinois, Indiana, New York, Maryland, and Missouri are also poised to redraw their maps, with partisan control of state governments fueling the drive for political advantage.
The escalation, experts say, is unprecedented. Kareem Crayton, vice president at the Brennan Center for Justice, described this summer’s redistricting blitz as “unprecedented,” pointing to the 2019 Supreme Court decision in Rucho v. Common Cause as the catalyst. “It was the beginning of an invitation to states to go hog wild, and they have, unfortunately,” Crayton told Roll Call. Adam Kincaid of the National Republican Redistricting Trust echoed this sentiment, noting that legal challenges and mid-decade redistricting have become the norm since at least 2000. “We’ve been in a constant state of lawfare and mid-decade redistricting since 2000 at a minimum,” Kincaid said.
Back in California, the legal wrangling continues. Four Republican legislators, aided by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon’s private law firm, have sued the state to remove Proposition 50—the ballot measure enacting Newsom’s plan—from the November 4, 2025, special election. Their argument hinges on a state rule requiring ballot questions to stick to a single subject, a common tactic for opponents of complex measures. The California Supreme Court denied their first challenge last week, but the group’s lead attorney insists that circumstances have changed now that the election is officially scheduled and Prop 50 is on the ballot.
Newsom’s campaign has met these challenges with defiance. “Trump’s toadies already got destroyed once in court. Now, they are trying once again—to protect Trump’s power grab and prevent voters from having their say on Prop 50. They will lose,” campaign spokesperson Hannah Milgrom said in a statement reported by CalMatters.
President Donald Trump himself has entered the fray, threatening on September 1, 2025, to sue California through the Department of Justice to block the Newsom plan. “Well, I think I’m going to be filing a lawsuit pretty soon and I think we’re going to be very successful in it,” Trump said from the Oval Office. “We’re going to be filing it through the Department of Justice. That’s going to happen.” Whether Trump’s threat materializes remains uncertain; the White House did not respond to requests for comment, and the Department of Justice declined to elaborate. Corrin Rankin, chair of the California Republican Party, was noncommittal about Trump’s involvement: “I’m not going to get ahead of the president,” she said.
Ironically, while California Republicans strive to focus criticism on Newsom’s circumvention of the independent commission, they have been careful not to openly challenge Trump’s own calls for red states to gerrymander in favor of the GOP. “It should not be Gavin Newsom vs. Trump. It should not be California vs. Texas,” Rankin asserted at a news conference. “It should be what’s in the best interest of Californians, and what’s in the best interest of Californians is for us to determine who represents us.”
The stakes are high, and the rhetoric is escalating on both sides. Former President Barack Obama has thrown his weight behind Newsom’s response to the Texas map, warning in a video appearance with Eric Holder, “We’re facing an existential threat to our democracy.” Meanwhile, the anti-Trump message remains a potent force in California politics. In 2021, Newsom successfully fended off a recall effort by framing the race as a referendum on Trump—a playbook he appears ready to dust off for the Proposition 50 campaign. When Trump threatened legal action, Newsom was quick to respond with an all-caps social media post: “BRING IT.”
Nationally, the implications are profound. As Chris Warshaw of George Washington University told Roll Call, the escalation of mid-decade redistricting could “nationalize state races” and make governor’s and state Supreme Court races hinge on redistricting power. Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University and former White House adviser, warned that constant redistricting can backfire, making incumbents vulnerable and angering voters. “What’s the point of changing the district lines and ticking off your congressional delegation if it doesn’t achieve much?” Levitt asked. The risk of “mutually assured destruction” may, in his view, ultimately put a brake on the redistricting arms race.
The present turmoil also signals a retreat from the movement for independent redistricting commissions. By 2021, 22 states had adopted some form of commission, according to the Campaign Legal Center. Yet, as Warshaw observed, “Now we are already seeing the unraveling of nonpartisan commissions that were really doing a lot of good. One of the things that gave me hope about the future was the growth of nonpartisan commissions.”
Litigation is already shaping the future of congressional maps. In Utah, a state court last month found the current map violated a voter-approved provision for an independent process, denying the legislature’s bid to delay redistricting. Texas’s new map is also embroiled in court, as challengers seek to block it before 2026. Meanwhile, a Louisiana case before the Supreme Court could further alter the legal landscape.
With the November 2025 ballot initiative looming in California—and similar debates unfolding nationwide—the outcome of these redistricting battles could define the balance of power in Congress for years to come. As voters, lawmakers, and courts grapple with the future of representation, the only certainty is that the fight over who draws the lines is far from over.
