Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

California Considers a Reversal of Its Independent Redistricting Model

News

Map of California.

California Democrats are weighing a plan to redraw the state’s congressional map. The move would undo the voter-approved system created to take politics out of redistricting.

Getty Images, KeithBinns

California Democrats are weighing a plan to redraw the state’s congressional map. The move would undo the voter-approved system created to take politics out of redistricting. Governor Gavin Newsom has said he may call a special election this fall to ask voters for approval of a Legislature-drawn map if Texas moves forward with a midcycle redistricting plan expected to give Republicans more seats.

The proposal could flip up to five Republican-held districts and strengthen several competitive ones. Reports point to Orange County, San Diego County, and the Central Valley as primary targets. Republican representatives who could be affected include Ken Calvert, Darrell Issa, Kevin Kiley, David Valadao, and Doug LaMalfa. Any change would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers of the Legislature, followed by approval from voters.


The proposal would mark a major departure from the system approved through Propositions 11 and 20 in 2008 and 2010. These measures created an independent citizens commission that removed redistricting power from lawmakers. The commission has been widely praised for its transparency. After the most recent redistricting cycle in 2021, no lawsuits were filed over the maps.

The opposition is already mobilizing. Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the commission, has said he will actively campaign against the proposal. Civic groups such as Common Cause and the League of Women Voters warn that reopening the maps midway through the decade could damage public trust and set a precedent that invites future political manipulation.

The legal landscape complicates the picture. In 2019, the Supreme Court ruled in Rucho v. Common Cause that federal courts cannot decide cases involving partisan gerrymandering. That leaves most redistricting challenges to state courts or to lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act that focus on racial discrimination in map design.

According to constitutional lawyer Nathaniel Maranwe, states have broad discretion when it comes to redistricting. “California can, legally speaking, redraw its congressional map for partisan reasons if it wants to,” he told The Fulcrum. “The Constitution gives states the power to set the times, places, and manner of elections. That includes partisan gerrymandering. The Supreme Court has made it clear that it’s not for the courts to decide whether it goes too far.” Still, he added, “Most people would agree—or at least say they agree—that voters should choose their politicians, not the other way around.”

Christopher Migliaccio, a lawyer and founder of Warren & Migliaccio, LLP, said the implications go well beyond California. “If the state overrides its voter-approved independent redistricting commission to redraw congressional maps, it would set a major precedent that a state can retract prior nonpartisan reforms in response to external partisan gerrymanders,” he said in an interview with The Fulcrum. “California’s system has been held up as a national model for transparency; to date, no lawsuits challenged its maps, a testament to its legitimacy. Dismantling it may alienate independents and weaken future bipartisan mapping efforts.”

Migliaccio also noted that California’s options for challenging maps in other states are limited. Since Rucho closed the door to federal courts on partisan gerrymandering claims, the most viable strategies rely on state constitutions or Voting Rights Act cases that focus on racial vote dilution rather than party advantage.

Republican Rep. Kevin Kiley said he plans to introduce legislation that would ban midcycle redistricting nationwide. His bill would invalidate maps drawn outside the regular census cycle, including proposals in Texas and California. He called Newsom’s effort a power grab that undermines the will of the voters. California Republican Party Chair Corrin Rankin echoed that concern, saying that any attempt to bypass the redistricting commission erodes public confidence and undermines reforms that were put in place for a reason.

The measure’s future depends on whether Democratic leaders can secure enough support in the Legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot and whether Newsom follows through with a special election. Supporters argue that California should not allow other states to tilt the playing field unchallenged. Opponents warn the move could open the floodgates for both parties to dismantle independent processes whenever it suits them.

Several congressional districts are being watched closely. In Orange County, Democrats are eyeing changes to Young Kim’s CA 40 and looking to shore up districts held by Derek Tran in CA 45, Dave Min in CA 47, and Mike Levin in CA 49. In San Diego County, Issa’s CA 48 may be redrawn to include more Democratic voters, and Levin’s seat may also be adjusted.

Inland, Calvert’s CA 41 has grown more competitive in recent cycles. In the Central Valley, Democrats are targeting Valadao’s CA 22 and hoping to protect Adam Gray in CA 13. In northern California, Democrats may try to shrink margins in Kiley’s CA 3 and LaMalfa’s CA 1, though population density makes big changes difficult.

If California moves ahead, it would be the first large Democratic-led state to overturn a redistricting commission in response to partisan gerrymandering in other states. The outcome could reshape how redistricting reform is viewed nationwide and signal that no structure is safe from political pressure.


Alex Segura is a bilingual, multiple-platform journalist based in Southern California.


Read More

Solidarity Without Borders: Civil Society Must Coordinate Internationally to Protect Democracy and Rights

People standing, holding letters that spell out "courage."

Photo provided

Solidarity Without Borders: Civil Society Must Coordinate Internationally to Protect Democracy and Rights

Across every continent, marginalized communities face systematic, escalating threats wherever democracy comes under attack. In the United States, Black Americans confront voter suppression and attacks on our history. Across the Americas, immigrants and racialized communities face racial profiling and assault by immigration enforcement. In Brazil and across South America, Indigenous peoples endure environmental destruction and rising violence. In Europe, Roma communities, immigrants, and refugees experience discrimination and hostile policies. Across Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, members of marginalized ethnic and religious communities face state violence, forced labor, and the denial of basic human rights. In every region of the world, members of the LGBTQ+ community face discrimination and threats.

These are not random or isolated acts of oppression. When considered together, they reveal something more sinister: authoritarianism is becoming increasingly more connected and coordinated around the world. This coordination specifically targets the most vulnerable because authoritarians understand that it is easier to manipulate a divided and fearful society. Attacking those who are most marginalized weakens the entire democratic fabric.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Party That Seeks to Nationalize and Control Elections Has Entered Fascist Territory

Donald Trump’s call to “nationalize” elections raises constitutional alarms. A deep dive into federalism, authoritarian warning signs, and 2026 implications.

Getty Images, Boris Zhitkov

A Party That Seeks to Nationalize and Control Elections Has Entered Fascist Territory

I’m well aware that using the word fascist in the headline of an article about Donald Trump invites a predictably negative response from some folks. But before we argue about words (and which labels are accurate and which aren’t), let’s look at the most recent escalation that led me to use it.

In Trump’s latest entry in his ongoing distraction-and-intimidation saga, he publicly suggested that elections should be “nationalized,” yanking control away from the states and concentrating it at the federal level. The remarks came after yet another interview in which Trump again claimed, without evidence, that certain states are “crooked” and incapable of running fair elections, a familiar complaint from the guy who only trusts ballots after they’ve gone his way.

Keep ReadingShow less
Building Power to Advance Inclusive Democracy: The Pro-Democracy Narrative Playbook
Picture provided

Building Power to Advance Inclusive Democracy: The Pro-Democracy Narrative Playbook

Around the world, including here in the United States, evidence shows that authoritarians are dominating the information ecosystem. Orchestrated, well-resourced, and weaponized narratives are being used to justify repression and delegitimize democratic principles and institutions. At the same time, the word “democracy” has been appropriated and redefined to protect certain freedoms granted only to certain people and to legitimize unchecked power. These actors have learned from each other. They borrow from a shared authoritarian playbook to blend traditional propaganda with digital-age disinformation techniques to reshape public perception. The result is an environment in which democratic norms, institutions, and basic freedoms are under a coordinated, sustained attack.

Yet even as these threats grow, democracy advocates, journalists, election workers, civil society organizations, and everyday citizens are stepping up—often at great personal risk—to protect democratic rights and expose repression. They have been doing all of this without the benefit of a research-based narrative or the infrastructure to deploy it.

Keep ReadingShow less
As America Turns 250, It’s Time to Begin Again
selective focus photo of U.S.A. flag
Photo by Andrew Ruiz on Unsplash

As America Turns 250, It’s Time to Begin Again

I know so many people are approaching America’s 250th anniversary with a sense of trepidation, even dread. Is there really anything to celebrate given the recent chaos and uncertainty we’ve been experiencing? Is productively reckoning with our history a possibility these days? And how hopeful will we allow ourselves to be about the future of the nation, its ideals, and our sense of belonging to something larger than ourselves?

Amid the chaos and uncertainty of 2026, I find myself returning to the words of the writer and civil rights activist James Baldwin. Just as things looked darkest to Baldwin amid the struggle for civil rights, he refused to give up or submit or wallow in despair.

Keep ReadingShow less