Why California’s Prop 50 Maps Likely Stand After Texas Map Was Struck Down

California’s newly drawn congressional map, approved by voters as Proposition 50, is likely to remain in place despite a federal court ruling that blocked Texas’ mid-decade map. Key to that outcome: lawmakers removed a “trigger” clause during the legislative process that would have tied California’s redistricting to actions taken by other states.

When first proposed, the legislation that became Prop 50 contained a provision saying California would implement the new map only if another state — such as Texas or Florida — enacted a new congressional plan during a specified window and that the change was not compelled by a federal court order. Lawmakers deleted that trigger before final passage, so the recent Texas decision does not automatically undo or activate California’s lines.

What officials are saying

Gov. Gavin Newsom celebrated the Texas ruling on X, writing, “Donald Trump and Greg Abbott played with fire, got burned and democracy won.”

Paul Mitchell, the consultant whose firm drew California’s map, posted on social media that California’s Prop 50 maps will remain in effect, noting the trigger language had been removed during the legislative process.

Legal context and separate fact patterns

The federal court in Texas found in a 2-1 decision that there was “substantial evidence” of racial gerrymandering in the state’s 2025 map. Judges examined a July Justice Department letter asserting problems with parts of Texas’ 2021 map and concluded Texas’ approach improperly used race as a predominant consideration. Texas has appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Legal experts say the facts relied on in the Texas case differ materially from the issues raised in lawsuits over California’s maps. Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, noted that Texas’ case turned on how that state actually drew its lines and alleged racial predominance — whereas California’s redistricting was crafted largely for partisan reasons and challengers have not shown an excessive focus on race.

Ongoing litigation and political stakes

The Trump administration has sued to challenge California’s new congressional lines; a hearing in that case is scheduled for Dec. 3. Texas faces a compressed calendar as congressional candidates must file by Dec. 8 for next year’s midterms, with primary ballots planned for March. The Supreme Court’s decisions in related voting-rights cases — including disputes over Louisiana’s map and the scope of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — could reshape the legal framework for future redistricting.

Implications

For now, California’s Prop 50 plan is poised to move forward, but unresolved litigation in both states and pending high-court rulings mean the broader rules governing how race and partisanship can be weighed in redistricting remain in flux. Lawmakers, candidates and voting-rights advocates will be watching the courts closely as timelines for filing and campaigning approach.