Supreme Court declines challenge to California’s congressional map
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to California’s redistricting bid that would add more Democrat-majority districts in the state.
In November, California voters approved Proposition 50, a ballot measure that allowed mid-decade congressional redistricting. The measure was proposed by the Democrat-led General Assembly to add as many as five congressional districts in favor of Democrats.
The California Legislature took up the effort after legislators in Texas redrew congressional maps to add as many as five districts in favor of Republicans. However, lawyers for the Trump administration urged justices on the Supreme Court to strike down California’s map.
The lawyers argued Prop. 50, the California ballot measure to approve the new congressional district lines, made distinctions on race and should be classified as racial gerrymandering. Prop. 50 passed with nearly 65% of the vote in the Nov. 4 general election.
“An injunction effectively requiring California to return to its earlier map would be less disruptive to the State’s election apparatus than allowing the Prop 50 map to go into effect,” the lawyers wrote.
“Under the proposed lines, Democrats could gain up to 5 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives,” California Democrats wrote. “With a majority in the House, Democrats can fight back against Trump and Republicans’ MAGA agenda.”
Latest News Stories
Special session for congressional maps set to convene
Trump officials explain assassination attempt charges on alleged attacker
Virginia Supreme Court questions redistricting process
Tillis affirms support of Warsh ahead of Wednesday vote
Jack Daniel’s maker faces foreign takeover push
Pritzker pushes housing plan described as ‘all stick,’ no carrot
Alleged attacker charged with attempted assassination of Trump
Republican lawmakers say shooting proves need for Trump ballroom
White House calls for DHS funding after correspondents incident
Report: $186 billion in federal payment errors likely an undercount
Convenience store advocate: Swipe fee ruling is ‘one step’ in the process
Report: Sharp ideological divide in Minnesota congressional delegation