The Department of Justice (DOJ) has publicly supported Texas in its ongoing legal battle with the Supreme Court regarding its newly approved congressional map. The DOJ, representing the Trump administration, has argued that the map drawn by the Republican-led legislature does not represent an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
In an amicus brief, Solicitor General John Sauer contested the lower court’s decision to block the map, claiming that its reasoning was flawed and that the redistricting process was motivated by partisan interests rather than race. Sauer emphasized the overwhelming evidence of partisan objectives and dismissed any suggestion that the state used racial considerations to shape the map.
The plaintiffs, including numerous voting and immigrant rights groups, have argued that the DOJ’s letter to Texas mischaracterized the so-called ‘coalition districts’ as unconstitutional, suggesting that the state was under legal obligation to revise them. The case has drawn national attention as it is part of a broader trend of redistricting disputes across the country, with Texas’ mid-cycle redistricting at the center of a larger political and legal debate over the balance between partisan strategy and equal representation.
Texas has asked the Supreme Court to pause the three-judge panel’s ruling in the Western District of Texas that found 2-1 last week that race was too much of a factor in its redraw. In a lengthy and wild tirade, Judge Jerry Brown, a Reagan appointee and the lone dissenter, called the three-judge panel’s decision the