Reagan-Appointed Judge Launches Scathing Dissent Against Redistricting Ruling
Circuit Court Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan appointee on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, has issued a highly contentious 104-page dissent criticizing Judge Jeffrey Brown’s decision to block Texas’s new redistricting map. Smith, a Yale Law School graduate, accused Brown, a Trump appointee, of engaging in ‘judicial activism’ and accused the majority opinion of being a ‘prime candidate’ for the ‘Nobel Prize for Fiction.’
The ruling, which temporarily blocks Texas from using its redistricting map in the 2026 midterms, has sparked significant debate. The majority opinion argued that the map, which aimed to create five new Republican-leaning districts, was a product of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. Smith, however, strongly disputed this claim, accusing the majority of ‘living in a fantasyland’ and engaging in ‘judicial tinkering.’ He also implicated Democratic mega-donor George Soros and Governor Gavin Newsom in the ruling’s supposed bias, suggesting that they were the main beneficiaries of the decision.
In a particularly striking criticism, Smith noted that the two judges in the majority did not wait for his dissent before issuing their decision, a move he described as ‘unfair’ and indicative of a lack of judicial restraint. ‘Any pretense of judicial restraint, good faith, or trust by these two judges is gone,’ Smith wrote, expressing his deep concerns about the integrity of the judicial process.
The Supreme Court is now under intense pressure to act swiftly on this pivotal election issue, as Texas candidates must declare their candidacy by December 8. The high court is also considering a similar Voting Rights Act case from Louisiana, with oral arguments heard last month and expected to address race provisions in the law during the current term. The ruling could have significant implications for the upcoming midterms, as the redistricting map could influence the balance of power in Congress.
Meanwhile, Republican Governor Greg Abbott, who has already turned to the Supreme Court for relief, faces ongoing political and legal challenges in his efforts to overturn the ruling. The decision has further complicated the already contentious redistricting battle, with potential consequences for both Republicans and Democrats as they prepare for the 2026 midterms.
The case highlights the deepening political and legal divide over redistricting and its impact on election outcomes. As the Supreme Court prepares to address this issue, the nation watches closely for a decision that could shape the course of future elections and the balance of power in Congress.
Related Stories
REPUBLICANS PUSH BACK OVER ‘FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM’ IN BLOCKBUSTER REDISTRICTING FIGHT
FEDERAL JUDGES BLOCK TEXAS FROM USING REDRAWN CONGRESSIONAL MAP