Judge Jeffrey V. Brown authored a 160-page ruling that blocked Texas' middecade congressional map, finding it to be an unconstitutional racial gerrymander that targeted Black and Hispanic voters to gain five additional GOP House seats. The opinion faulted a Justice Department letter from Harmeet Dhillon for injecting race into the redistricting process and said lawmakers deliberately reshaped districts along racial lines. The court enjoined the map's use in 2026 and ordered Texas to revert to its prior plan; the state is expected to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Federal Court Blocks Texas Map That Sought Five Additional GOP Seats, Calling It an Unconstitutional Racial Gerrymander
Judge Jeffrey V. Brown authored a 160-page ruling that blocked Texas' middecade congressional map, finding it to be an unconstitutional racial gerrymander that targeted Black and Hispanic voters to gain five additional GOP House seats. The opinion faulted a Justice Department letter from Harmeet Dhillon for injecting race into the redistricting process and said lawmakers deliberately reshaped districts along racial lines. The court enjoined the map's use in 2026 and ordered Texas to revert to its prior plan; the state is expected to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
05:24 AM, 11/19/2025Politics
Federal Court Rejects Texas Redistricting Plan
A federal three-judge panel on Tuesday blocked Texas' middecade congressional map, concluding the plan was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander designed to dilute Black and Hispanic votes and to secure five additional Republican seats for the U.S. House.
In a detailed 160-page opinion, Judge Jeffrey V. Brown — a conservative nominee of former President Donald Trump — wrote that the Texas Legislature "intentionally drew district lines" to disadvantage Black and Hispanic Texans. The opinion also criticized a July letter from Harmeet Dhillon, then head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, finding that the DOJ's involvement injected race into the process and supplied a legally flawed pretext for the new map.
How the plan unfolded
According to the court's findings, President Trump reportedly urged Texas officials to adopt a map that would produce at least five additional GOP seats in the 2026 midterms. Many state Republicans, including Governor Greg Abbott, initially resisted a blatantly partisan redraw. On July 7, Dhillon sent a letter to the governor claiming existing congressional districts were racially unconstitutional and threatening litigation unless they were redrawn; two days later the governor called a special session to enact a new map.
Democratic state legislators fled the state in an attempt to prevent a quorum, but the Republican majority enacted the new plan. Voting-rights groups sued, arguing the map intentionally discriminated on the basis of race in violation of the 14th and 15th Amendments. Under federal procedure, the case — LULAC v. Abbott — was heard by a three-judge district court (Brown, David C. Guaderrama, and Jerry E. Smith). By a 2–1 vote, the court sided with the plaintiffs; Brown and Guaderrama formed the majority.
Why the court found the map unlawful
Judge Brown emphasized that while partisan redistricting is often permissible, the Constitution forbids sorting voters primarily by race. The ruling explains that Texas lawmakers, citing the Dhillon letter and a misreading of the Fifth Circuit's decision in Petteway v. Galveston County, dismantled existing multiracial "coalition" districts and reconstituted districts along racial lines. Brown found the Dhillon letter contained numerous legal and factual errors and that even the Texas attorney general's office — typically aligned with the state GOP — had criticized the letter's reasoning.
The court described a deliberate mapmaking strategy: creating several Hispanic-leaning districts while scattering other nonwhite voters (including many Black residents) into majority-white, Republican-leaning districts to dilute minority voting power. The record included explicit admissions from lawmakers and expert analysis the court said demonstrated discriminatory intent.
"The Legislature intentionally drew district lines" — Judge Jeffrey V. Brown
As a result, the court held the map used unconstitutional racial classifications that deprived minority voters of their rights under the 14th and 15th Amendments, and enjoined its use in the 2026 elections. The panel ordered Texas to revert to the prior congressional map unless it produces a lawful alternative.
What comes next
Texas is expected to appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court and seek a stay of the district court's order while the appeal is pending. The Supreme Court's recent voting-rights jurisprudence has at times been skeptical of certain Voting Rights Act protections, which could influence its review. But Brown grounded his ruling primarily in constitutional protections against racial discrimination in voting, not on the VRA alone.
The decision carries broader implications: it underscores legal limits on using race as the basis for redistricting and highlights how middecade mapmaking can trigger nationwide contests over partisan advantage. For now, the blocked map will not be used in 2026 unless higher courts rule otherwise.