Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Flag
People holding an american flag with 1776-2026
Photo by TROY ALLEN on Unsplash

Americans Stay Committed to Democracy as Confidence Declines

The Democracy for All Project, a multiyear collaboration between Gallup and the Charles F. Kettering Foundation, continues its effort to understand how Americans experience democracy and how those experiences differ across communities, generations, and political identities. Its September 2026 report, Frustration Rises, Commitment Endures, draws on a survey of 23,683 U.S. adults conducted between April 24 and June 10, 2026, with a maximum margin of sampling error of ±1 percentage point at the 95% confidence level. It is the most extensive annual study of how Americans participate in and perceive the democratic system.

A Public Still Committed to Democracy—But Increasingly Disillusioned

The report finds that Americans remain committed to democracy as an ideal even as their confidence in its performance continues to erode. Two‑thirds (66%) still say democracy is the best form of government, essentially unchanged from last year. Yet assessments of how democracy is functioning have worsened: 56% now say democracy is performing poorly, up from 51% in 2025, while the share who say it is performing well has fallen to 19%. Much of this shift comes from Republicans and Republican‑leaning independents, whose views have moved closer to the more critical assessments long held by Democrats and other independents.

Keep ReadingShow less
A U.S flag flying.

Constitution Day gets little fanfare compared to July 4th, but an attorney argues it should remind every American of their role in defending democracy.

Prasit photo/Getty Images

Defending the Constitution Is a Year-Round Responsibility—No Oath Required

For 250 years and counting, Americans have celebrated Independence Day on July 4 through fireworks, concerts, parades, barbecues, and more. By contrast, Constitution Day arrives soon after, on September 17, with far less fanfare. It is not a time to hear patriotic medleys on the radio, enjoy 20% off a new air-conditioner, watch a hot-dog-eating contest, or exchange cheerful greetings with neighbors. The observance marks the anniversary of the moment when 39 delegates signed our nation’s founding document at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 17, 1787. Constitution Day came and went last month with little public awareness. But the observance should inspire all Americans to protect our cherished Constitution throughout the year.

Presidents of the United States recite an oath of office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This oath, familiar to many Americans who watch Inauguration Day ceremonies, is mandated by the Constitution itself (Article II, Section 1, Clause 8). Public officials, judges, service members, and lawyers like me also swear oaths to support the Constitution as part of their public or professional roles.

Keep ReadingShow less
Voting Booths set up in rows on Election Day

Faith leaders can help renew America's social and civil contracts by protecting every eligible vote and honoring lawful results. Here's how to get involved.

adamkaz/Getty Images

Dignity, Democracy, and the Courage to Stay Engaged

Crises are arriving faster than we can absorb them: climate, loneliness, artificial intelligence, housing, addiction, debt. In communities across Washington state, what I see is not mainly anger. It is a sense of being overwhelmed.

When everything feels urgent, people are tempted to withdraw. And when enough of us quietly withdraw, we can begin to believe that nothing works anymore and the rules no longer apply.

Keep ReadingShow less
United States Capitol building with US flag

United States Capitol building shows classical architecture and an American flag waving against a clear blue sky.

Getty Images

Our Democracy Is a Beast, When It Should Be a Buffalo

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists.

We asked Alejo Cruz, a Fall Fulcrum Fellow, to share what democracy means to him and how he sees its current health.

Keep ReadingShow less