Updated November 18, 2025 at 10:09 PM EST
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has quickly appealed to the Supreme Court a ruling that the redistricting passed by lawmakers at the urging of President Trump was based on racial gerrymandering.
"Any claim that these maps are discriminatory is absurd and unsupported by the testimony offered during ten days of hearings," Abbott, a Republican, said in a statement. "This ruling is clearly erroneous and undermines the authority the U.S. Constitution assigns to the Texas Legislature by imposing a different map by judicial edict."
A three-judge panel had earlier Tuesday placed a temporary block on the map that Republican lawmakers passed this summer and ordered the state to use the district maps from the last two elections.
The map that was overruled had been drawn to give Republicans an advantage in flipping as many as five House seats held by Democrats.
"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," wrote the majority from a three-judge panel.
The panel heard a trial on the case in October. The plaintiffs included several civil rights groups and individuals.
The ruling is a blow to Trump and the Republicans in a nationwide redistricting race that began in Texas this summer.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate, also said he would appeal the ruling on the "Big Beautiful Map" which he called "entirely legal" in a statement.
Democrats praised the court ruling. "Race was always a driving factor and a driving factor to make it harder for minority Texans," said Texas Congresswoman Lizzie Fletcher in an interview. "This map was drawn to make it harder for them to have an impact in elections."
The court's decision, in a 2-1 ruling, comes at a pivotal moment. Around the country, Trump is pressing Republican state lawmakers to reshape congressional voting maps to hold the party's slim majority in the House and support his agenda.
Using their heavy Republican majority in the legislature, Texas lawmakers passed a map in August designed to help their party grow its ranks in the 2026 elections for the U.S. House.
The process gained national attention when Democrats in the legislature fled the state for over two weeks to delay a vote and Republican leaders threatened to arrest them. Democrats argued the new map weakened the voting power of Latino and Black communities.
The redistricting in Texas also prompted California Democrats to act. This month California voters passed an initiative allowing redistricting that could help Democrats win five seats in that state.
Was it partisan gerrymandering or racial gerrymandering?
Republicans in the Texas Legislature passed the map saying it was designed to improve their party's chances of winning five congressional seats. They noted that, unlike in some states, the law in Texas does not prohibit redistricting for partisan advantage and that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that federal courts could not intervene when it's done.
But partisan gerrymandering can often overlap with racial gerrymandering, which is illegal. Opponents of the map argued in court that it intentionally diminished the voting power of minority communities.
The 160-page opinion was written by District Judge Jeffrey V. Brown, who was appointed by Trump during his first term as president. His ruling drew upon statements and contradictions in what Republican lawmakers said as the maps were passed.
A letter the Department of Justice wrote to encourage the redistricting, ended up being grounds the court used to block the effort.
The judges noted that when Gov. Abbott originally called lawmakers into session to draw the map, he cited a letter from justice department officials criticizing districts that had majority non-white voting populations as "racial gerrymanders." In other words, the letter implied the districts as they stood gave non-white voters an advantage and that had to be reversed.
Eventually, Texas Republicans said the map was not intended to correct for a racial tilt but for partisan gain.
That letter put lawmakers, who for years had denied their use of race when making maps, in "a difficult spot" according to University of Texas at Austin political scientist Josh Blank, because they were "ultimately saying opposite things."
Brown's ruling criticized the construction of the letter itself, which was sent by Harmeet Dhillon, head of the Justice Department's civil rights division. "It's challenging to unpack the DOJ Letter because it contains so many factual, legal, and typographical errors," Brown wrote.
"This decision is a rebuke of Donald Trump and to some degree a rebuke of lawmakers in Texas," said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political scientist with the University of Houston. "They think the process was flawed and the Department of Justice was not credible in their legal arguments."
Rep. Gene Wu, Democratic leader in the Texas House, said Tuesday's ruling shows the courts still hold true to American principles.
"The striking down of the maps is fundamentally a sign that the courts still believe in the core principles of this country: That one man, one vote idea is something that is absolute and must be kept up," Wu said.
Around the country, Republicans have more options for redistricting seats their way than Democrats do, in part because the GOP controls more state legislatures. Usually, states redistrict at the start of the decade after the national census.
At the behest of Trump, lawmakers in Missouri and North Carolina passed new maps that could help the GOP win a seat in each state. Ohio drew a map that analysts say gives Republicans a slight advantage in a few seats.
For Democrats, in addition to the five seats that could be gained in California, a court-ordered redistricting in Utah could help Democrats win a seat there. And Virginia Democrats have started a process that could yield two seats in that state.
Blaise Gainey covers state politics for The Texas Newsroom. Andrew Schneider covers politics and government for Houston Public Media.
Larry Kaplow with NPR contributed to this story.
Copyright 2025 The Texas Newsroom
