5 things to know about the Texas special session on redistricting

Texas Republicans are using this month’s special session to attempt to lock in the party’s majority in Congress by means of weakening or eliminating Democratic districts in the state. 

As President Trump’s approval ratings slide and as Republicans brace for an unfavorable midterm environment, the president has called on the Texas GOP to give him five more seats in a nearly deadlocked House — forcing Democrats into a fight over redistricting they had hoped would happen in 2030, after they had several more years to make gains in the state. 

Now that struggle likely will take center stage in the special session — originally called by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) to deal with issues like a THC ban and the need for flood warning systems after this month’s catastrophic floods — and risks opening up a redistricting arms race around the country. 

Here are five things to know about the special session on redistricting: 

How does it work?  

In legislative terms, redistricting proceeds like any other piece of legislation: A bill introduced in the House’s standing committee on redistricting then moves through other committees to a floor vote. If that bill becomes law, then a redistricting committee comprising state leaders — now all GOP — will get to redraw congressional maps. 

It’s the circumstances around that potential bill that are unusual — and that, in Texas, carry deep historical overtones.  

While redistricting generally only happens every decade after the results of the decennial census, Texas Republicans have often used middecade restricting to cement their power. 

In 2003, Republican leaders took advantage of the Statehouse’s first GOP majority in a century to pass new maps that broke apart the districts of Texas Democratic members.  

That broke a century-old Democratic majority in Texas’s congressional delegation. Following redistricting after the 2000 Census, Democrats won 17 House seats during the 2002 election, while Republicans won 15. 

But in 2004, after the initial redistricting push, those numbers were more than reversed. In the new districts, after trusted incumbents lost their seats, Democrats took just 11 seats — and Republicans 21. 

How many more districts will be added? 

In short, it’s up in the air.

Trump has demanded the state party find him five more seats; lawmakers have not yet publicly released any proposals of a redrawn House map, which is expected to happen after the session begins Monday. Right now, the current partisan breakdown in Texas’s delegation in the House is 25 Republicans and 12 Democrats. 

Significantly, Texas isn’t the only GOP-led state planning to redraw its lines this year. Ohio was already planning to undergo the process because of House maps passed in 2022 that did not have bipartisan support.  

Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D) and Emilia Sykes (D) in Ohio’s 9th and 13th Congressional Districts, respectively, are among the most vulnerable and likely to be targeted. 

Rep. Greg Landsman (D), who represents Ohio’s 1st Congressional District in Cincinnati, could also be targeted.

How will existing districts be affected?  

On July 7, Trump’s Department of Justice sent a letter to Texas demanding redistricting on the grounds that four majority-minority “Black-brown” districts were “unconstitutional racial gerrymanders” under the Voting Rights Act — and urged the state to break them up. 

The legal analysis in that argument is “superficial,” Harvard Law School professor Guy Charles wrote after the letter, arguing its purpose was primarily "to provide a justification for Texas if it redraws those four districts.” 

The DOJ focus on Black-brown districts suggests redistricting will take a form similar to the hub-and-spoke maps adopted after 2003: Democratic coalition districts broken up into overwhelmingly minority districts in the urban core, surrounded by Republican-majority districts with fantails stretching out through the suburbs. 

The districts targeted in the DOJ letter are a Fort Worth-area district represented by Rep. Marc Veasey (D), and three Houston districts represented by Democratic Reps. Al Green, Sylvia Garcia and the late Sylvester Turner — the last of which is in the middle of a special election to fill the seat.  

But one state Democratic strategist compared the four districts listed in the Trump DOJ letter to a “lockpick” that allowed state Republicans to begin redrawing maps at will, meaning that far more districts could be targeted — particularly white Democrats like Reps. Lizzie Fletcher or Lloyd Doggett. 

While the Justice Department in its letter argued “several Texas Congressional Districts constitute unconstitutional racial gerrymanders,” The Texas Tribune noted that state lawmakers who drew the House maps after the 2020 Census argued they had drawn their lines with no regard for race. 

How will it impact the midterms? 

The midcycle redistricting could aid congressional Republicans who are bracing to lose some seats — and their razor-thin majority in the House. If the Texas plan succeeds, it offers a cushion to offset some of their losses — though if Republicans try to claim too many seats, they risk diluting their power and making formerly-safe Republican seats more competitive. 

There’s another risk: Triggering a redistricting arms race around the country. In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) followed the DOJ letter by announcing his own plans to pursue middecade redistricting, House Democrats in other blue states are hoping to see their maps revisited and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has hinted the party is looking at New Jersey and New York. 

Those states incorporate the use of a redistricting commission to create their maps, presenting hurdles for lawmakers.

What are Texas Democrats doing to respond?  

Damage control. For Texas Democrats, the model for how to fight redistricting is what they did in 2003 and 2021: Flee the state to deny Republicans a quorum — the necessary minimum number of members present to do business. 

Neither is a particularly encouraging model, however. Both times, Republicans ultimately passed the legislation in question, and sustaining such a campaign now would be difficult: Legislative Democrats would have to remain in exile until next year’s primaries, away from their families and facing $500 fines per person per day. 

But while the 2003 and 2021 walkouts failed at blocking Republican bills, they did draw national attention and ultimately help the party win a better deal than they otherwise might have. 

Some party strategists are arguing that a strategic retreat this time, coupled with an aggressive messaging campaign targeting President Trump’s unpopular spending bill, could help Democrats turn a debacle into an opportunity, particularly if Republicans overreach.