• Trump-appointed judge finds substantial evidence new district lines racially gerrymandered minority voters
• Three-judge panel orders Texas to return to 2021 map blocking GOP’s five-seat gain strategy
• Ruling deals major blow to Trump’s national redistricting push ahead of crucial 2026 midterm elections

AUSTIN, Texas (TDR) — A federal court blocked Texas from using its newly drawn congressional map Tuesday, finding substantial evidence of racial gerrymandering and ordering the state to revert to its 2021 district lines for the 2026 midterm elections in a significant setback for President Donald Trump‘s national redistricting campaign.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, whom Trump appointed in 2019, wrote that challengers were “likely to prove at trial that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map” despite the state’s claims that redistricting was purely partisan. The three-judge panel split 2-1, with Obama appointee David Guaderrama joining Brown while Reagan appointee Jerry Smith dissented.

“The public perception of this case is that it’s about politics,” Brown wrote in the 160-page opinion. “To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map. But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map.”

DOJ letter sparked racial redistricting

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

The ruling centered on a July letter from Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department, warning Gov. Greg Abbott of potential legal action over Texas’s existing “coalition districts” — areas with non-white majorities where no single racial group constitutes 50%.

Brown eviscerated Dhillon’s letter in his decision, calling it “challenging to unpack” because it contains “so many factual, legal, and typographical errors.” He noted that even attorneys employed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton — “who professes to be a political ally of the Trump Administration” — described the DOJ letter as “legally unsound,” “baseless,” “erroneous,” “ham-fisted,” and “a mess.”

The judge found that Abbott explicitly directed the Texas Legislature to redistrict based on race by citing the DOJ letter when calling a special session. The resulting map “achieved all but one of the racial objectives that DOJ demanded,” dismantling coalition districts across the state.

Map would have netted five GOP seats

The blocked map would have given Republicans approximately five additional House of Representatives seats in 2026, potentially expanding their narrow majority. The new lines decreased from 16 to 14 the number of congressional districts where minorities comprise a majority of voting-age citizens, eliminating five of nine coalition districts.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

Texas Republicans drew the map during an August special session, with state lawmakers repeatedly insisting the process was conducted “race-blind” and designed solely to improve GOP electoral performance. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that partisan gerrymandering cannot be challenged in federal courts, but racial gerrymandering remains unconstitutional under the Voting Rights Act.

“The radical left is once again trying to undermine the will of the people,” Paxton said in announcing a planned appeal to the Supreme Court. “The Big Beautiful Map was entirely legal and passed for partisan purposes to better represent the political affiliations of Texas.”

National redistricting battle continues

The Texas ruling arrives amid an unprecedented national redistricting war initiated by Trump, who urged GOP-controlled states to redraw congressional maps mid-decade despite Census data normally driving redistricting only every 10 years. Missouri and North Carolina followed Texas with new maps adding one Republican seat each.

California voters responded by approving a ballot initiative in November to redraw their state’s congressional districts, potentially giving Democrats five additional seats to counter Republican gains in Texas and other states.

The Justice Department has since sued California over its new maps, arguing they constitute racial gerrymandering despite being framed as a partisan effort. A court hearing on that case is scheduled for next month.

Tight deadline for Supreme Court appeal

Texas faces a December 8 filing deadline for congressional candidates, giving the state limited time to appeal to the Supreme Court. Abbott vowed to “swiftly appeal,” calling the ruling “clearly erroneous” and claiming it “undermines the authority the U.S. Constitution assigns to the Texas Legislature.”

Texas Democrats who fled the state during the special session to delay passage of the map celebrated Brown’s decision. State Rep. Rafael Anchía declared: “A federal court just stopped one of the most brazen attempts to steal our democracy that Texas has ever seen.”

The Supreme Court is already considering broader questions about racial gerrymandering lawsuits in a long-running Louisiana case, potentially setting precedent that could affect the Texas appeal and similar challenges nationwide.

Civil rights groups representing Black and Hispanic voters argued the new map reduced minority voting influence by drawing five of six Democratic lawmakers facing primary challenges against other incumbents into districts together — with all five being Black or Hispanic.

Should federal courts have authority to block state redistricting plans drawn for partisan advantage?

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10