Dem
47
GOP
53
Sleazy gerrymandering is going to be a major theme of American politics for the foreseeable future. There's still some juice there for the 2026 cycle (keep reading). Meanwhile, in 2028, states that did not get their ducks in a row in time for 2026 are likely to take their shots. Further, and this is pretty important, the "break glass in case of emergency" has been shattered. That is to say, mid-census redistricting has been seen as dirty pool for many years. But now, everyone is doing it—red states and blue. Indeed, any state that doesn't do it is just putting its majority party at a disadvantage. So, the shenanigans will continue until there's finally some sort of national anti-gerrymandering legislation.
Yesterday, there were a trio of key developments as regards the 2026 maps. First up is South Carolina. The state Senate there was reluctant to get rid of the one Democratic district, currently represented by Jim Clyburn. So, they adjourned for the year. Then, Gov. Henry McMaster (R) called them back into special session, and he and Donald Trump both told the state legislature to get it done. Yesterday afternoon, the state Senate once again told Trump and McMaster to pound sand. So, Clyburn looks to be safe for at least one more term, which means he'll remain gainfully employed to the age of 88. Score: Democrats 1, Republicans 0.
Meanwhile, as we wrote about here, the Supreme Court has made clear that racial gerrymanders are illegal, while political gerrymanders are A-OK. What they haven't made clear is how to tell whether or not a gerrymander is racial, particularly if the folks responsible for it claim it's just political (and, of course, they always claim that). It would seem that a three-judge panel from the Eleventh Circuit was able to figure it out, though. Yesterday, they ruled unanimously that the new Alabama map "intentionally discriminated based on race in violation of the Constitution," and therefore cannot be implemented. If that holds up, then Alabama's house delegation will likely stay 5R, 2D, instead of shifting to 6R, 1D.
Naturally, Alabama AG Steve Marshall (R, in case you didn't already know) says he will appeal. However, he does face a couple of obstacles here. The first is that Alabama already postponed its primary once, and there isn't a whole lot of time for an appeal to play out, unless it is expedited. The second is that yesterday's ruling did not come from a trio of wild-eyed pinkos. The three judges are a Bill Clinton appointee and two Donald Trump appointees. So, a different group of judges may not produce a different result. Score: Democrats 2, Republicans 0, at least for now.
And finally, there was a period of time where Maryland was the mirror image of South Carolina, where the Democratic-controlled state Senate was resisting the elimination of the state's one Republican-held seat. That period of time might be over, as Maryland Senate President Bill Ferguson (D), who almost single-handedly killed the effort to redistrict in advance of the 2026 election, indicated yesterday that his thinking has... evolved. "The rules have changed," he explained to reporters, also noting that Maryland "must respond as the ground shifts." There is still theoretically time for a special session, and time for new maps, though Maryland would almost certainly have to do as Alabama has done, and reschedule its primary (June 23) for later in the summer. If there is a new map, whether now or before the 2028 cycle, then it is Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), chair of the House Freedom Caucus, who will end up being thrown out on his ear. Score: Democrats 3, Republicans 0, tentatively.
A couple of weeks ago, it was Republicans getting all the good news on the redistricting front. Yesterday, it was Democrats. That also means, necessarily, that Democrats got bad news a couple of weeks ago, and Republicans got bad news yesterday. Again, we hope that both parties get lots and lots and lots of bad news. Only then might something be done to put a stop to this undemocratic nonsense. (Z)