The Supreme Court on Wednesday turned away an emergency appeal from the California Republican Party that sought to stop the implementation of a newly adopted congressional map that could improve Democrats’ chances of gaining seats in the upcoming midterm elections.
The unsigned order allows the map to go into effect. Analysts say the boundaries could position Democrats to flip as many as five House seats in California, according to National Review.
Gov. Gavin Newsom, who put forward the new map last year after President Trump encouraged Republican-led states to redraw districts to benefit the GOP, welcomed the court’s decision in a statement.
“Donald Trump said he was ‘entitled’ to five more congressional seats in Texas,” Newsom said. “He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he’ll lose again in November.”
Newsom approved two redistricting measures in August, setting the stage for a Democrat-favorable map that was placed before voters in a special election held in November 2025.
After voters narrowly approved the proposal, the California GOP filed suit. A three-judge federal panel ultimately upheld the map. Writing for the majority, U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton said the evidence showed the plan “was exactly what it was billed as: a political gerrymander designed to flip five Republican-held seats to the Democrats.”
Republicans then asked the Supreme Court to intervene, contending that California, “under the guise of partisan line-drawing,” had “expressly used race” in crafting the districts, calling it a “pernicious and unconstitutional” practice.
The dispute unfolded as the high court permitted Texas Republicans to proceed with their own redistricting plan after a separate panel of judges temporarily blocked that effort. In a concurring opinion issued in December, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that it was “indisputable” that “the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.” Because those maps were drawn for political rather than racial reasons, he said, they are lawful.
In the California case, attorneys for the Trump administration filed a brief backing the state GOP, arguing that California’s map differed from Texas’ because it was “tainted by an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.” The administration claimed the lines were designed to strengthen Latino voting power.
Newsom and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber rejected those allegations, noting that the total number of Latino-majority districts in the state did not change under the new map.