The political landscape in Texas is once again at the center of a heated national debate as the state’s controversial congressional redistricting plan faces a pivotal legal test in federal court. On October 10, 2025, attorneys for civil rights organizations and the State of Texas delivered their closing arguments before a three-judge panel in El Paso, capping off a trial that could reshape the state’s political map ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
The case revolves around five congressional districts redrawn by Texas lawmakers in August 2025, a move widely seen as an effort to secure Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives. Civil rights groups, including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), allege that the new maps intentionally dilute the voting power of Hispanic and African American communities by shifting thousands of minority voters from traditionally Democratic districts into ones more likely to elect Republicans. According to Border Report, the plaintiffs argue this amounts to race-based gerrymandering, a practice prohibited by the Voting Rights Act.
"This is race-based gerrymandering prohibited by the Voting Rights Act," lawyers for LULAC and allied organizations told the court, urging the judges to issue a temporary injunction halting the implementation of the new maps. Their argument hinges on evidence that some Hispanic-majority districts were left with just over 50 percent of voting-age residents from the community, offering no guarantee that minorities could elect candidates of their choice. The plaintiffs also noted that the redistricting could force sitting Democratic members of Congress to run against each other, further weakening minority representation.
The state’s attorneys, however, pushed back forcefully, insisting that politics—not race—drove the redistricting process. They cited a July 7, 2025, letter from the U.S. Department of Justice expressing concern about the legality of five so-called coalition districts, which combine enclaves of Hispanics, African Americans, or other minorities into single districts that often elect minority representatives. The state maintains that the Legislature simply targeted Democratic strongholds for political reasons, and that many of those voters happened to be minorities. "It is not sufficient to say, 'That doesn’t look like party-driven, that looks like race,'" the state’s lawyers argued, according to Border Report. "The plaintiffs did not prove that the Legislature’s intent was to suppress the vote of minorities."
In a notable moment during closing arguments, a state attorney referenced former President Donald Trump’s public call for redistricting to secure a House majority, suggesting that his comments provided the political impetus for the map changes. The attorney stated, "There can be no doubt the reason for the federal redistricting in Texas is that President Trump publicly said he wanted to redistrict to keep a majority in the House of Representatives." The state also pointed to Democratic-led gerrymandering in states like Massachusetts and California, arguing that partisan redistricting is a bipartisan tradition and that objections only arise when minority voters are affected.
The three-judge panel—Senior U.S. District Judge David Guaderrama of El Paso, District Judge David Brown of the Southern District of Texas, and Judge Jerry E. Smith of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—now faces the task of weighing these arguments. The court has until December 8, 2025, to rule on the requested injunction, but the judges hinted they might deliver a decision within weeks. Both sides have been asked to submit written summaries of their conclusions, and the judges acknowledged that their ruling is likely to be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The uncertainty surrounding the congressional maps has already begun to shape the 2026 election cycle. Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the HB 4 redistricting law in September 2025, setting the stage for the new districts to be used in the upcoming midterms. Yet, as Border Report noted, some politicians have already declared their intent to run in the newly drawn districts, even as the legal battle continues. Plaintiffs argue that the previous 2021 maps should remain in effect until the courts resolve the dispute.
This legal showdown comes at a time when Texas’s political currents are shifting in unexpected ways. According to a statewide poll conducted by the University of Houston and Texas Southern University between September 19 and October 1, 2025, support for President Donald Trump among Texas voters has declined since his 2024 reelection victory. While Trump won Texas with 56 percent of the vote against Democrat Kamala Harris last year, only 49 percent of respondents said they would back him again if given the chance. The poll found notable drops in Trump’s support among independents (down 20 percentage points), Gen Z voters (down 16), Democrats who previously backed him (down 10), and Latino voters (down 12).
The poll’s managers highlighted a dramatic shift among Latino voters, a group whose defection to Trump in 2024 helped Republicans flip key districts along the Rio Grande. "While Trump’s advantage over Harris among these Latino voters in 2024 was 8 percentage points, if these Latino voters could vote again for president, Harris would lead Trump by 11 percentage points among Latinos, marking a 19 percentage point shift," the poll managers explained, as reported by the Houston Chronicle. This change could undermine the very foundation of the Trump-engineered redistricting plan, especially since at least two of the newly drawn districts are anchored in heavily Latino South Texas.
The poll also shed light on the evolving dynamics in the 2026 U.S. Senate race. On the Republican side, Attorney General Ken Paxton maintained his lead, with Senator John Cornyn closing the gap to just one percentage point. U.S. Representative Wesley Hunt, who announced his candidacy after the poll was conducted, still managed to capture nearly a quarter of GOP respondents’ support. Among Democrats, former U.S. Representative Colin Allred performed better than other declared candidates in hypothetical matchups, while State Representative James Talarico polled stronger than Allred among Democratic respondents. Notably, former U.S. Representative Beto O’Rourke and current U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett would be immediate frontrunners if they entered the race, despite not being declared candidates at the time of the survey.
Still, the poll’s authors cautioned that early candidate-preference polls can be misleading, as many voters are not yet fully engaged with the 2026 midterms. The broader voter attitudes—especially toward Trump and the Republican Party—may ultimately prove more consequential. The Houston Chronicle noted that the Republican enthusiasm following their 2024 victories and the mid-decade redistricting could be tempered by the memory of 2018, when Democrats flipped a record 12 Texas House seats in a midterm backlash against Trump’s first term.
As the legal and political battles over Texas’s congressional map intensify, both parties are watching closely. Democrats see an opportunity to challenge what they view as unconstitutional racial gerrymandering, while Republicans defend the redistricting as a legitimate exercise of political power. The outcome of the court case will not only determine the boundaries of five key districts but could also set a precedent for future redistricting fights across the country.
With the court’s decision looming and voter sentiment shifting, the stage is set for a high-stakes showdown that could reshape Texas’s political landscape for years to come.
