The State Capitol is seen in Austin, Texas, on June 1, 2021. Eric Gay/AP
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that found Texas’ 2026 congressional redistricting plan likely discriminates on the basis of race.
The order, signed by Justice Samuel Alito, will remain in place for at least a few days while the court decides whether to allow the new map — drawn to favor Republicans — to be used in next year’s midterm elections. Alito handles emergency appeals from Texas.
The court’s conservative majority has repeatedly stayed lower-court redistricting rulings when they come close to elections. The state asked the high court to intervene about an hour before the order, citing the approaching congressional primary elections in March. The justices have blocked similar rulings in Alabama and Louisiana that came months before elections.
Texas redrew its congressional map in the summer as part of efforts backed by former President Trump to preserve a slim Republican majority in the House. The GOP-drawn map was engineered to create five additional Republican seats. A three-judge federal panel in El Paso ruled 2-1 this week that civil rights groups suing on behalf of Black and Hispanic voters were likely to prevail in proving the map is racially discriminatory.
If the judges’ ruling ultimately stands, Texas could be forced to hold elections under the map the GOP-controlled Legislature adopted in 2021 based on the 2020 census.
Texas was the first state to adopt a map reflecting Trump-era goals in this broader national redistricting fight. Missouri and North Carolina subsequently adopted maps that each added one Republican seat. In response, California voters approved a ballot initiative that will effectively add five Democratic-leaning seats there. The new maps in California, Missouri and North Carolina also face legal challenges.
Separately, the Supreme Court is considering a Louisiana case that could further limit race-based districts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It remains unclear how that decision might affect the current wave of redistricting disputes.