Supreme Court Allows Redrawn Texas Congressional Map And Cue the Democrat Meltdown

by

In a major setback for Gavin Newsom and Democrats nationwide, the Supreme Court late last night upheld Texas’ new redistricting map — a map that is poised to give Republicans additional House seats in the 2026 midterms. The ruling came down 6–3, with the Court’s liberal justices in dissent.

It’s a significant victory for Texas, a blow to Democratic gerrymandering complaints, and a reminder that states still have the authority to draw their own lines — despite the left’s ongoing attempts to weaponize the courts when elections don’t tilt their way.

The 20-page ruling said that the District Court had erred when it blocked the new map.

“Texas is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the District Court committed at least two serious errors,” the nation’s top court wrote. “First, the District Court failed to honor the presumption of legislative good faith by construing ambiguous direct and circumstantial evidence against the legislature.”

The ruling said that lower federal courts shouldn’t ordinarily alter election rules before an election. “The District Court improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign, causing much confusion and upsetting the delicate federal-state balance in elections,” the SCOTUS ruling said.

Naturally, this raises the question of what it might mean for the legal challenges aimed at California’s own redistricting map — but that’s a battle for another day.

What’s clear right now is that the panelists on MS NOW were anything but pleased, including the network’s fake Republican and former RNC chair Michael Steele:

“Because Texas said we drew it for political reasons, not race, they’re using political as the cover over race, and so if this becomes the norm that means any state in the country, particularly states in the south with a history of discrimination can claim that they are doing things with their state maps under the guise of partisan and political, when they’re really using race,” whined co-host Symone Sanders Townsend.

“The Supreme Court put itself in the position of the district court. It should not have done so. It is not its role. And they basically slapped the district court,” added Steele. “The other thing that I find frustrating is essentially, I’m looking at the disintegration of civil rights at the hands of a party and a political philosophy that once existed within that party that elevated those civil rights.”

Of course, it is the role of the Supreme Court to correct unfair district court rulings.

And as Darkins asked, would MS NOW apply this same logic to California’s maps? The answer is no, because…of course:

And where Democrats have no power to legislate, they do so from friendly federal courts.

Back to Steele…

Yeah, I wonder. Constantly.

Leave a Comment