Democrats hear some criticism as redistricting talk picks up

Outside groups are raising concerns that Democrats risk violating the Voting Rights Act with redistricting plans, creating a new problem for the party as it seeks to answer GOP efforts to redistrict its way to more power. 

Democrats say they have to take action to draw new House districts in states they control in response to power plays by a Trump-driven GOP in Texas and other states.  

But the tit-for-tat has left groups leaving the door open to litigation. They also are making a moral case, arguing Democrats are thwarting the democratic process. 

“This is dead wrong from a democracy perspective, I think it’s very problematic for Democrats from a political strategic perspective,” explained Dan Vicuna, director of voting and fair representation at Common Cause.  

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is the only Democratic governor so far to signal he’s considering several ways to counter the GOP’s efforts in Texas. 

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Newsom said any move by California “is predicated on Texas moving forward” with its own redistricting plan, which some have seen as a way for the Lone Star State to make it more likely to hold on to five House seats. 

Several other Democratic governors, including Govs. Kathy Hochul of New York, Phil Murphy of New Jersey and JB Pritzker of Illinois have left the door open to possibly changing their maps.

The GOP may also not be done. The White House is reportedly pushing Missouri to consider redrawing its map. 

Civil rights and voting groups are worried actions by both parties could undermine or weaken the political power of historically marginalized minority communities.

The issue is a thorny one for Democrats, who have positioned themselves as the prodemocracy party and championed racial justice initiatives.

At the same time, Democratic states just like Republican states have been sued by civil rights groups over Voting Rights Act violations. Both Democrats and Republicans have also been found guilty of creating gerrymandered maps. 

“We have sued both Democrats and Republicans on these issues,” said Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 

“So yes, we are concerned that when leaders of either party seek to take maximum advantage, partisan advantage of redistricting, they often neglect, if not ignore, the imperatives of the Voting Rights Act with respect to reliably Democratic voting groups.”

Some groups are also frustrated given efforts by blue states to move beyond gerrymandering.

“Independent commissions like the gold standard in California were created specifically to avoid what's being considered here, which is voting maps drawn for the sole purpose of protecting incumbent politicians and political party interests to the exclusion of community needs and community feedback,” Vicuna said. California Common Cause was intimately involved in the creation of California’s independent commission. 

It could be difficult for some Democratic-held states to answer Texas. Several would likely need to change their state constitution and work around their respective redistricting commissions.  

Should the Lone Star State craft new House lines, John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, in a statement said they would be met “with a wall of resistance and a wave of legal challenges.”

His statement did not address Democratic-led states mulling their own midcycle redistricting. 

Democrats argue that if Republicans are headed down that road, nothing should be off the table for them as well. 

“Republicans should be careful what they ask for,” Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), chair of the House Democrats’ campaign arm, told The Hill in a statement.  

“And if they go down this path? Absolutely folks are going to respond across the country. We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine the voices of the American people.” 

Democrats are also leaning into the issue of democracy, saying the longevity of the country is at stake if the party does not respond. Newsom painted the situation in grim terms, saying on Friday, “I believe that the people of the state of California understand what's at stake. If we don't put a stake into the heart of this administration, there may not be an election in 2028.” 

“We can sit back and act as if we have some moral superiority and watch this 249, almost 250-year experiment be washed away,” Newsom said. “We are not going to allow that to happen. We have agency, we can shape the future.” 

Civil rights and voting-focused groups, however, are concerned about the ramifications midcycle redistricting could have moving forward, including the possibility of what was once considered a decennial process after each U.S. census turning into a cyclical issue. 

“One of the concerns that we have is, even if blue states have power and have a majority in their legislature to redraw maps, our concern is that this could set a bad precedent, because those states could, at the same time, flip in the future,” said Jose Barrera Novoa, vice president of the far west for the League of United Latin American Citizens. 

“And the same thing is going to happen where ... other parties are going to look to redraw the map midcycle or even quarterly. Who knows?” he asked. “It's all hypothetical, yet it's still very possible.” 

Not only could a potential redistricting tit-for-tat raise questions over whether this could be repeated in the future, experts also worry about the financial toll it could take on their resources and voters themselves. 

“These are judges managing these cases, hearing these cases. Many of these people are paid out by state funds, and federal cases, of course, are also paid by voters directly,” explained Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters, noting cases that use taxpayer funds. 

“Do we really want to spend this time doing this highly unusual activity when we're all going to have to pay for it?”