Federal Court Blocks Texas’s 2025 Congressional Map, Calls It Likely Racial Gerrymander

Federal panel orders Texas to revert to post-2020 congressional map

A federal court on Tuesday blocked Texas from using the new congressional map adopted for the 2025 midterm elections, finding the plan is likely an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The three-judge panel ordered the state to revert to the map enacted after the 2020 census while the dispute moves forward.

The ruling represents a major setback for Republican efforts to redraw mid-decade districts in their favor. Texas lawmakers had designed the new map to help flip five Democratic-held U.S. House seats — a potentially decisive change given the current slim Republican majority in the House.

The 2-1 decision is expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The panel’s majority included U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, a 2019 appointee, and Judge David Guaderrama; Judge Jerry Smith dissented.

Why the court intervened

Judge Brown concluded challengers are “likely to prove at trial that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map.” His opinion focused in part on a July letter from the Justice Department’s civil rights leadership that warned the state against creating so-called coalition districts — districts in which non-white voters collectively form a majority but no single racial group is a majority.

Brown faulted state leaders for responding to that letter by directing the Legislature to redraw districts in a way that, he found, targeted coalition districts based on race. He wrote that the Legislature’s enacted map achieved nearly all of the racial objectives identified in the DOJ letter and dismantled multiple coalition districts around the state.

“Nor is it lawful for a legislature to purposefully target such districts for destruction,” Brown wrote.

Reactions and legal stakes

Texas officials and Republican leaders condemned the ruling. Attorney General Ken Paxton called the map “entirely legal” and defended the redistricting as partisan, not unlawful. Pam Bondi, who criticized the decision, said the state’s map was "drawn the right way for the right reasons." Governor Greg Abbott criticized the court’s intervention as an overreach that undermines the legislature’s authority.

Democrats who opposed the map praised the ruling. State Representative Gene Wu said the court stopped what he called a brazen attempt to dilute minority representation.

The dispute in Texas is part of a broader national battle over mid-decade redistricting. The Justice Department has also challenged a Democratic-drawn map in California, arguing that in practice race — not mere partisanship — was the driving factor. Those disputes may ultimately be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court, which in past decisions has left challenges to racial gerrymandering and Voting Rights Act violations open even as it limited federal review of partisan gerrymanders.

Context and implications

Republican-drawn maps in several states targeted multiple Democratic-held seats, many represented by Black or Latino lawmakers. Civil rights groups say such plans risk diluting the political power of racial and ethnic minorities, pointing to disparities between the state’s demographic composition and the party makeup of its congressional delegation.

The high court is already considering related questions about how race may be used in drawing districts, and a decision in a separate Louisiana case could affect the future of Voting Rights Act protections. Appeals in the Texas case are expected, and the issue may return to the Supreme Court.

Contributors: Arlette Saenz and John Fritze.