Across the United States, a new phase in the long-running fight over gerrymandering is unfolding. Once seen as a uniquely partisan tool of entrenched statehouses, the practice of drawing political lines to favor one party and punish the other is now being openly embraced by both sides. California Democratic officials say they are “fighting fire with fire” and engaging in a “tit-for-tat” response to Texas’ aggressive pro-Republican redistricting. The result is a political arms race that could reshape the balance of power in Congress for years to come.
How Gerrymandering Works
Gerrymandering manipulates electoral maps to maximize partisan advantage by “packing” voters of the opposing party into as few districts as possible or “cracking” them across many districts to dilute their influence. With these tactics political map-makers can all but guarantee outcomes before a single ballot is cast. In states where one party controls both the legislature and the governor’s office, redistricting often becomes an exercise in consolidating power rather than reflecting population shifts fairly. And voters pay the price.
Why Is It Allowed?
Many Americans wonder why such overt manipulation of democracy persists. The answer lies in both tradition and law. The U.S. Constitution grants states the authority to manage elections, including drawing congressional maps. While federal courts once intervened in extreme cases, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2019 (Rucho v. Common Cause) that partisan gerrymandering claims are “political questions” beyond the reach of federal judges. In essence, the Court has said it cannot act as referee in this struggle, leaving the issue to states and Congress.
California vs. Texas
Texas has been at the forefront of drawing maps that bolster Republican dominance, even as the state’s demographics grow more diverse. Now, California Democrats are signaling they won’t remain passive. By reworking district boundaries to counterbalance Republican gains elsewhere, they argue they are defending democracy, even as critics note they are adopting the very tactics they once decried.
The Stakes for Democracy
The battle over gerrymandering raises sobering questions about the health of American democracy. When districts are engineered to ensure predetermined outcomes, voter choice is diminished, political polarization deepens, and public trust erodes. Without meaningful reforms, such as independent redistricting commissions or federal standards, elections risk becoming less about voters choosing their representatives and more about representatives choosing their voters.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene leaves the battlefield in the states, and the combatants are digging in. Whether the public views this as a pragmatic defense or a betrayal of democratic ideals, one thing is certain: the future of legitimate representative government in America may hinge on how far this gerrymandering arms race goes.
Guest:
Samuel Wang is with the Princeton University Gerrymandering Project.
"The Source" is a live call-in program airing Mondays through Thursdays from 12-1 p.m. Leave a message before the program at (210) 615-8982. During the live show, call 833-877-8255, email thesource@tpr.org.
This interview will air live on Thursday, August 28, 2025, at 12:00p.m.
