The Supreme Court on Thursday paved the way for Texas to use its new congressional map—an undeniable victory for Republicans who stand to gain as many as five seats in the 2026 midterms. Not bad for a party the Left keeps insisting is “losing ground,” right?
In an unsigned order, the justices granted Texas’ emergency request to block a lower court ruling that tried to toss out the map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton celebrated the decision, saying the state is “taking our country back, district by district, state by state.” And honestly, when the Left throws lawsuit after lawsuit hoping something sticks, it’s refreshing to see the courts swat down the nonsense.
The high court made it clear: Texas is likely to win when the case returns on the merits. The justices said the state met the “traditional criteria for interim relief” and pointed out at least two major errors by the lower court. First, the district court ignored the usual presumption that lawmakers act in “good faith”—apparently a concept that mysteriously evaporates whenever Democrats dislike the outcome. Second, the challengers never produced an alternative map that met Texas’ stated partisan goals without the racial elements they complained about. Minor detail, right?
Timing also played a major role. With Sunday being the candidate filing deadline, the majority reminded the lower courts that they shouldn’t “alter the election rules on the eve of an election.” Yet another example of a court stepping into an active primary and creating chaos—because who doesn’t love an 11th-hour legal circus?
The order keeps the map in place for 2026 as long as Texas files its appeal on time.
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, made it even clearer: this map was driven by politics, not race. He noted it was “indisputable” that Texas—just like California—designed its map for partisan advantage. It’s almost as if politics is, well… political. Shocking, I know.
Alito criticized the lower court for misapplying legal standards and warned that racial gerrymander claims can “easily” be used for partisan ends. If challengers want to accuse states of racial motives, they actually have to disentangle race from politics—something the plaintiffs’ experts conveniently failed to do.
Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, penned a fiery dissent, accusing the majority of tossing aside the clear-error standard and overturning a detailed record “based on its perusal, over a holiday weekend.” According to her, the order “disserves” millions of Texans. According to everyone else… elections in Texas can now move forward without judicial meddling.
Texas House Democrats complained on X that the Supreme Court “failed Texas voters” and “failed American democracy.” Whenever Democrats lose ground, “democracy” is suddenly in danger. Funny how that works.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has been encouraging Republican-led states to redraw their maps to help preserve the GOP’s narrow House majority in 2026. His call sparked action in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, and Utah—potentially adding up to nine new Republican seats. That’s what leadership looks like.
Democrat-led states, unsurprisingly, scrambled to counter. California voters approved a constitutional amendment suspending the independent commission for this cycle and replacing it with a map that conveniently secures about five more Democratic seats. Virginia and Maryland are also exploring ways to “adjust” their maps—because when Democrats redraw lines, it’s suddenly noble and righteous, not “partisan.” Very convenient timing.
But at the end of the day, the Supreme Court’s decision marks a strong win for Texas, for the GOP, and for every voter tired of watching activists weaponize the courts. And with 2026 around the corner, momentum is clearly on our side—something worth celebrating as we keep pushing forward with confidence.
