The Senate approved the bill in an vote and the House approved it in an vote. Abbott signed the map into law on October 25, Click the link below to see an image of the approved congressional district map. Click here to view all maps considered by the House and Senate. Apportionment is the process by which representation in a legislative body is distributed among its constituents. The number of seats in the United States House of Representatives is fixed at The United States Constitution dictates that districts be redrawn every 10 years to ensure equal populations between districts.
Every ten years, upon completion of the United States census, reapportionment occurs. The U. Census Bureau delivered apportionment counts on April 26, Texas was apportioned 38 seats in the U.
House of Representatives. This represented a net gain of two seats as compared to apportionment after the census. On February 12, , the Census Bureau announced that it would deliver redistricting data to the states by September 30, On March 15, , the Census Bureau released a statement indicating it would make redistricting data available to the states in a legacy format in mid-to-late August A legacy format presents the data in raw form, without data tables and other access tools.
On May 25, , Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost R announced that the state had reached a settlement agreement with the Census Bureau in its lawsuit over the Census Bureau's timetable for delivering redistricting data. Under the terms of the settlement, the Census Bureau agreed to deliver redistricting data, in a legacy format, by August 16, On November 2, , Texas Democratic lawmakers filed three separate lawsuits seeking to overturn the enacted redistricting maps.
Beverly Powell D along with six Tarrant County voters filed a federal lawsuit. The member Texas House Mexican American Legislative Caucus filed a lawsuit against the state with the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in which the caucus members said the newly enacted maps "discriminate on the basis of race and impermissibly dilute the vote of Latino populations.
The caucus also filed a state court lawsuit in Travis County arguing that Texas House districts were drawn in violation of Article 3 of the Texas Constitution. In the complaint, the caucus members argued "The county line rule generally requires that state representative districts must either be made up of entire counties or wholly contained within the boundaries of a single county," and said the new House maps violate this rule because "HB 1 on its face violates the express, plain language of the county line rule by splitting the Cameron County line twice, extending in two different directions into two different contiguous counties to form two distinct state representative districts: House Districts 35 and On October 25, , Voto Latino, a Latino civil rights group, and 13 Texas voters filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas asking the court to overturn the state's redrawn congressional districts, saying that the new maps dilute the voting power of non-white voters.
The suit argued that although people of color accounted for the majority of Texas' population growth, which gained the state two additional congressional districts, "Senate Bill 6 appropriates those additional districts — and more — for white Texans. On October 18, , a Texas inmate filed a class action lawsuit against the state in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas saying that his assignment to a congressional district in which he does not live violates his right to equal representation.
In the complaint, inmate Damon Wilson requested "a declaratory judgment and a permanent injunction predicated on claims that his federal constitutional right to equal representation in the U. On October 18, , a group of Latino civil rights organizations filed a lawsuit against Gov. The groups said new redistricting maps diminish the voting power of Latino voters and are unconstitutional, and they asked the court to throw out the maps due to what they say is a violation of the Voting Rights Act.
State Sens. Sarah Eckhardt D and Roland Gutierrez D filed a lawsuit with the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas on September 1, , saying that the state legislature cannot legally redraw district maps because the Texas Constitution requires lawmakers to begin the process after the "first regular session after the publication of each United States decennial census.
Therefore, this Court faces the necessary duty of ensuring a constitutional administration of the Texas election cycle by drawing an interim map," the lawsuit said.
The suit asks the court to draw interim maps until the next regular legislative session in January of This section includes background information on federal requirements for congressional redistricting , state legislative redistricting , state-based requirements , redistricting methods used in the 50 states , gerrymandering , and recent court decisions.
According to Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution , the states and their legislatures have primary authority in determining the "times, places, and manner" of congressional elections. Congress may also pass laws regulating congressional elections. Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution stipulates that congressional representatives be apportioned to the states on the basis of population. There are seats in the United States House of Representatives.
Each state is allotted a portion of these seats based on the size of its population relative to the other states. Consequently, a state may gain seats in the House if its population grows or lose seats if its population decreases, relative to populations in other states.
Sanders that the populations of House districts must be equal "as nearly as practicable. The equal population requirement for congressional districts is strict.
According to All About Redistricting , "Any district with more or fewer people than the average also known as the 'ideal' population , must be specifically justified by a consistent state policy. And even consistent policies that cause a 1 percent spread from largest to smallest district will likely be unconstitutional. The United States Constitution is silent on the issue of state legislative redistricting. In the mids, the United States Supreme Court issued a series of rulings in an effort to clarify standards for state legislative redistricting.
In Reynolds v. Sims , the court ruled that "the Equal Protection Clause [of the United States Constitution ] demands no less than substantially equal state legislative representation for all citizens, of all places as well as of all races. In addition to the federal criteria noted above, individual states may impose additional requirements on redistricting. Perry signed the maps into law. On November 6, , the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas ordered that the state's existing district maps remain in place for the election cycle.
The court, however, stopped short of issuing a final decision: [56] [57]. On March 10, , the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas ruled that some of the congressional district boundaries adopted by the state legislature in had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent. The court ruled on the matter. The ruling did not apply to the remedial districts adopted in On April 20, , the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas ruled that some of the state house district boundaries adopted by the state legislature in had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent.
The decision did not apply to the remedial districts adopted in The maps' opponents alleged that the maps, like the original maps adopted in the wake of the United States Census, unconstitutionally diluted the voting rights of racial minority groups. State officials denied this, maintaining that the maps were substantially the same as those issued by a federal court in The trial continued through July 15, On August 15, , Judges Smith, Garcia, and Rodriguez issued a unanimous ruling finding that the maps for congressional districts 27 and 35 had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent on the part of the legislature.
The judges ordered state officials to inform the court within three days of the state legislature's intent to draft and implement new remedial maps. State Representative Rafael Anchia D , chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus a plaintiff in the case , supported the ruling: "Intentional discrimination is a bad habit for the Texas Legislature. With the seventh ruling of intentional discrimination since , a federal court confirmed today that Texas congressional maps remain unconstitutional.
But the portion of the ruling that went against Texas is puzzling considering the Legislature adopted the congressional map the same court itself adopted in , and the Obama-era Department of Justice did not bring any claims against the map.
We look forward to asking the Supreme Court to decide whether Texas had discriminatory intent when relying on the district court. On August 17, , Paxton announced that he had initiated an appeal of the decision to the Supreme Court of the United States. Paxton requested that the high court stay the lower court's ruling pending full review of the case. On August 24, , Judges Smith, Garcia, and Rodriguez issued a unanimous ruling finding that the maps for the following state House districts had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent on the part of the legislature: [70].
Paxton announced that he intended to appeal the decision. On August 28, , Associate Justice Samuel Alito of the Supreme Court of the United States stayed the district court's August 15 ruling on Texas' congressional district plan pending further review by the high court. On August 31, , Alito issued a similar order on the district court's August 24 ruling on Texas' state House district plan.
On September 12, , the high court voted to implement a full stay against both rulings pending progression of the state's appeal. According to The New York Times , the high court's order made it more likely that the election would be held using the existing district plans. On January 12, , the Supreme Court announced that it would hear the case, with oral argument scheduled for April 24, In March , United States Solicitor General Noel Francisco requested that court permit him, on behalf of the federal government, to argue in support of Texas during oral argument on April 24, On June 25, , the Supreme Court of the United States issued a ruling reversing the decision of the district court with respect to all challenged districts except House District For more information on the court's decision, see here.
On August 30, , the district court ordered the state legislature to adopt a remedial plan for House District 90 no later than within 45 days of the start of the regular legislative session. On May 28, , the court approved a remedial plan for House District On July 24, , the district court declined to subject the state to a federal preclearance remedy that would have required state lawmakers to obtain approval from the U.
Department of Justice before enacting changes to the state's election laws and procedures, including implementation of redistricting plans.
The court wrote the following in its opinion: "[The] Court has grave concerns about Texas's past conduct. During the legislative session, Texas engaged in traditional means of vote dilution such as cracking and packing in drawing districts, and also utilized newer methods of dilution and suppression such as using the 'nudge factor' and passing voter ID requirements.
Nevertheless, the Court concludes that ordering preclearance on the current record would be inappropriate, given the recent guidance from the Supreme Court and the Fifth Circuit. It is time for this round of litigation to close. There are conflicting opinions regarding the correlation between partisan gerrymandering and electoral competitiveness. In , Jennifer Clark, a political science professor at the University of Houston, said, "The redistricting process has important consequences for voters.
In some states, incumbent legislators work together to protect their own seats, which produces less competition in the political system. Voters may feel as though they do not have a meaningful alternative to the incumbent legislator.
In , James Cottrill, a professor of political science at Santa Clara University, published a study of the effect of non-legislative approaches e. Cottrill found that "particular types of [non-legislative approaches] encourage the appearance in congressional elections of experienced and well-financed challengers. In , John Johnson, Research Fellow in the Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education at Marquette University, reviewed the relationship between partisan gerrymandering and political geography in Wisconsin, a state where Republicans have controlled both chambers of the state legislature since while voting for the Democratic nominee in every presidential election but one since Today, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to live in both places where they are the overwhelming majority and places where they form a noncompetitive minority.
In , Ballotpedia analyzed the margins of victory in all contests for the United States House of Representatives. Ballotpedia found that the average margin of victory was A total of elections Sixteen elections 3. In Texas, 29 of 36 elections for the United States House of Representatives were won by margins of victory of 20 percent or greater.
The smallest margin of victory occurred in District 23, where Will Hurd R won by 1. The greatest margin of victory occurred in District 8, where Kevin Brady R ran unopposed and won by percent. See the table below for full details. In , Ballotpedia conducted a study of competitive districts in 44 state legislative chambers between , the last year in which district maps drawn after the census applied, and , the first year in which district maps drawn after the census applied.
Ballotpedia found that there were 61 fewer competitive general election contests in than in Of the 44 chambers studied, 25 experienced a net loss in the number of competitive elections. A total of 17 experienced a net increase. In total, In , An election was considered competitive if it was won by a margin of victory of 5 percent or less. An election was considered mildly competitive if it was won by a margin of victory between 5 and 10 percent.
For more information regarding this report, including methodology, see this article. In Texas, there were four competitive races for the Texas House of Representatives in , compared to 12 in There were five mildly competitive House races in , compared to seven in This amounted to a net loss of 10 competitive elections.
The tables below summarize the current partisan composition of the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas State Senate. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of mandates that electoral district lines cannot be drawn in such a manner as to "improperly dilute minorities' voting power. States and other political subdivisions may create majority-minority districts in order to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
A majority-minority district is a district in which minority groups compose a majority of the district's total population. As of , Texas was home to 18 congressional majority-minority districts. Proponents of majority-minority districts maintain that these districts are a necessary hindrance to the practice of cracking , which occurs when a constituency is divided between several districts in order to prevent it from achieving a majority in any one district.
In addition, supporters argue that the drawing of majority-minority districts has resulted in an increased number of minority representatives in state legislatures and Congress. Critics, meanwhile, contend that the establishment of majority-minority districts can result in packing , which occurs when a constituency or voting group is placed within a single district, thereby minimizing its influence in other districts.
Because minority groups tend to vote Democratic , critics argue that majority-minority districts ultimately present an unfair advantage to Republicans by consolidating Democratic votes into a smaller number of districts.
The tables below provide demographic information for each of Texas' congressional districts as of At that time, the population of the largest congressional district, Texas' 22nd Congressional District , totaled ,, and the population of the smallest, Texas' 13th Congressional District , totaled ,, which represented a difference of The following is a list of recent redistricting bills that have been introduced in or passed by the Texas state legislature.
To learn more about each of these bills, click the bill title. This information is provided by BillTrack50 and LegiScan. Note: Due to the nature of the sorting process used to generate this list, some results may not be relevant to the topic.
If no bills are displayed below, no legislation pertaining to this topic has been introduced in the legislature recently. The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Redistricting Texas. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
Redistricting in Texas - Google News. What's on my ballot? Elections in How to vote How to run for office Ballot measures. Who represents me? President U. This article contains a developing news story.
Ballotpedia staff are checking for updates regularly. To inform us of new developments, email us at editor ballotpedia. Ballotpedia features , encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. Click here to contact our editorial staff, and click here to report an error.
Another process directly linked to the census is reapportionment , which occurs primarily at the federal level. Reapportionment allocates the number of seats in a legislative body to account for population changes. The U. House of Representatives currently has a total of seats, distributed among the states according to census population figures. By contrast, the U. Senate has seats — two per state, regardless of population.
The Texas Legislature also has a fixed number of seats in both houses — 31 in the Senate and in the House.
In addition to the Legislature and the U. House, the State Board of Education SBOE and state judicial districts undergo redistricting after each census, as do some local governmental bodies including city councils, county commissioners courts and school district boards. Texas has been growing rapidly for decades, with a population now estimated at more than 29 million. From through , the number of Texans rose by Between and , Texas added more than 1, residents a day.
About half of them migrated to the state, according to U. The Lone Star State currently has 36 U. By law, the Census Bureau must send the population figures to the president by Dec. House seats. For redistricting purposes, the data must arrive at statehouses by April 1, , but Texas legislative officials expect the numbers sometime in late February.
Source: U. Although actual mapmaking for state and federal redistricting is more than a year away, the process is already in motion in Texas. Members are hearing testimony from subject-matter experts as well as policy advocates, interest groups and the general public.
All three were signed by the governor on June 26, One state House district was later struck on grounds that race predominated in the drawing of the district, without adequate justification; the district HD 90 was redrawn on May 28, Seats: projected.
Institution: Drawn by:. Plan Status:. Download Data for ,. Shapefile source:. If it fails to pass a plan, authority falls to a five-member backup commission, in place since The members and records of the state Senate redistricting committee are here ; the state House redistricting committee is here.
Texas state law does not impose a particular deadline for drawing congressional lines, though candidates must file for congressional primary elections by Dec. If the legislature fails to pass a plan by then, the backup commission will be convened within 90 days, and must pass a state legislative plan within 60 days of convening.
Texas ties the drawing of state legislative lines to the Census, and might therefore be construed to prohibit redrawing lines mid-decade, if the legislature and not a court has already conducted redistricting.
There is no similar provision pertaining to congressional lines. The Senate Select Committee on Redistricting has created a public input portal for public comment. The legislature has also announced that there will be opportunities to testify at legislative committee hearings, and to submit proposed district plans to the legislature when the new Census data are available. The meeting schedule will be posted here. Members of the public who wish to submit proposals may use this software, or any other software that produces a standard block equivalency file.
Texas must also, like all states, abide by the Voting Rights Act and constitutional rules on race. The state constitution further requires that state legislative districts be contiguous, and that they preserve whole counties when population mandates permit. Legislative Redistricting Board , S. Several lawsuits were almost immediately brought in state and federal court, challenging the malapportionment of existing districts, and asking the courts to assume jurisdiction and draw lines themselves.
All maps were submitted to a DC federal court for preclearance; on Nov. United States , F. The initial denial of preclearance in forced a federal court in San Antonio to draw interim maps for the elections. On Nov. Perry, No. Perry , F.
0コメント