Supreme Court orders California Democrats to justify Prop 50 maps

The Supreme Court on Thursday gave California Democrats a week to respond to the California Republican Party’s request to block the new Democrat-drawn congressional district maps from being used in November.

The request for a response, issued by Justice Elena Kagan, who is handling the emergency-injunction request for the court, surprised many court watchers.

Given that the justices allowed Texas Republicans’ gerrymandered map to stand, most thought the Supreme Court would allow the Los Angeles district court’s ruling earlier this month validating California’s new map to stand as well. California Republicans, however, argue that the new maps violate the Voting Rights Act because at least one of the districts was written to favor Latino voters.

The California Republican Party, joined by the Justice Department, Tuesday filed an emergency application at the Supreme Court in hopes of blocking the state from using the newly approved district maps, which target four to six Republican members of Congress, in the 2026 elections.

The request for a response is just that, however. The Supreme Court could still decline to take up the case. The high court is already deliberating over a voting rights case in Louisiana, the decision in which could impact its decision on the California map. In October, arguments concluded in a landmark voting rights case, Louisiana v. Callais that will determine whether Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map, which includes a second majority black district, is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. A high court decision is expected any day.

On Thursday, Mark Meuser, the election law attorney with the Dhillon Law Group who filed the challenge to the maps on behalf of the California Republican Party, celebrated Kagan’s order for California Democrats to respond by 4 p.m. Jan. 29.

“Supreme Court just ordered California to respond to our Emergency Application for an Injunction,” Meuser said in an X.com post. “California must respond by Jan. 29.”

In his brief supporting California Republicans, Solicitor General John Sauer underscored their argument, writing that “California’s recent redistricting is tainted by an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.”

The Supreme Court has allowed gerrymandering, and in the Texas case, approved mid-decade redistricting undertaken specifically to win more seats for Republicans purely for partisan gain. It has not, however, looked favorably on redistricting efforts undertaken to consolidate racial minorities’ power.

“But unlike Texas’s map, the [California] map suffers from a fatal constitutional flaw: one of the districts (District 13) was clearly drawn ‘on the basis of race,’” Sauer wrote in his amicus brief.

The California GOP asked the Supreme Court to rule on its injunction request by Feb. 9, when congressional candidate filing in California begins. The party also asked the justices to schedule oral arguments in the underlying case.

The Supreme Court approved Texas’ map, drawn with an eye toward winning Republicans five more seats in the Lone Star state, last month. California Democrats, led by California Gov. Newsom, aim to offset that with a map that could net Democrats five additional seats.

The national Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ political action committees then paid consultant Paul Mitchell to redraw the state’s 52 congressional districts. Newsom, arguing that Democrats must fight President Trump’s efforts to rewrite congressional maps in Republicans’ favor, then called a special election last November asking voters to approve it.

Proposition 50, as the ballot initiative was called, overwhelmingly passed with 64% of the vote.

Newsom on Thursday didn’t address Kagan’s move but commented on the larger issue in a tweet posted Thursday.

“Donald Trump called up [Texas Gov.] Greg Abbott and demanded more MAGA seats in Congress,” Newsom posted on X.com from Davos, Switzerland. “He thought we’d be good little Democrats and respond with an op-ed. Not this time, buddy.”

“I’m not naïve. These guys are going to try to take me down – not just my state,” Newsom added during an interview at the glitzy international economic gathering of world leaders.

A three-judge panel from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California rejected Republicans’ racial claims in their Jan. 14 order denying the state GOP’s petition.

“Challengers now seek to enjoin California’s use of the Proposition 50 Map, arguing that the predominant reason for its adoption was not politics but rather unconstitutional and unlawful racial gerrymandering,” the judges wrote.

“We have reviewed briefing from all parties, held a 3-day evidentiary hearing with 9 witnesses (including 6 experts), and reviewed a record that includes over 500 exhibits totaling thousands of pages … We find that [the] challengers have failed to show that racial gerrymandering occurred, and we conclude that there is no basis for issuing a preliminary injunction.”