Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

America’s Gerrymandering Crisis: Why Voters Are Losing Power in Texas and Beyond

Opinion

America’s Gerrymandering Crisis: Why Voters Are Losing Power in Texas and Beyond

People rally during the "Stop the Trump takeover" demonstration outside of the State Capitol on August 16, 2025 in Austin, Texas. Over 200 nationwide demonstrations occurred today against the Trump administration's newly introduced redistricting plans.

Getty Images, Brandon Bell

Voters should choose their politicians, not the other way around. The Texas gerrymander and the partisan war it has triggered signal an extraordinarily dangerous period for American democracy.

Gerrymandering leads to less choice, less representation for voters, and less accountability for politicians. It also produces more polarization, as party primary voters rather than general election voters have the loudest say. And voters of color all too often suffer the most as their communities are cynically sliced and diced to engineer partisan advantage.


The phenomenon is not new. In the very first congressional election, Patrick Henry drew a House district to try to keep James Madison from being elected to Congress. Both parties eventually participated in the practice. Over the years, technology and an increasingly partisan governing style have made things worse. In last year’s election, only 37 House seats were competitive, and those were decided by five percentage points or less. Just 11 of those districts flipped between parties.

But what’s going on in Texas now is particularly wrong. Gov. Greg Abbott is pursuing a gerrymander to produce five new seats for Republicans, mid-decade (long after the census), at the expense of Black and Latino voters, all on orders from a sitting president. It’s a raw power grab.

It is part of an unprecedented White House push to tilt the electoral terrain in 2026 and beyond. Vice President JD Vance just met with state leaders in Indiana to urge redrawing of maps there. Florida, Missouri, and other states may follow suit. President Trump even called for a new census that would exclude undocumented immigrants. (That’s logistically impossible as well as unconstitutional.) Last week, the Brennan Center for Justice outlined how the administration aims to undermine election rules across the country.

It’s no surprise that Democrats are responding as they have across the nation: They’re outraged and have pledged to redraw maps in states they control. Gov. Gavin Newsom plans to put a new map before California voters in November to match Texas’s harvest of Republican seats. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul vowed to “fight fire with fire.”

But ultimately, a partisan redistricting arms race cannot be the only answer. We urgently need national redistricting standards that apply across the country — to red states and blue states alike.

On this topic, in recent years, the Supreme Court has walked away from its duty. In Rucho v. Common Cause in 2019, it declared that federal judges could not protect against unfair maps. Racial discrimination is still illegal, but judges now wink and allow politicians to gerrymander so long as they claim it’s about politics, not race.

Even so, the Court noted that Congress has the constitutional power to set national standards. And just recently, it almost did.

The Freedom to Vote Act sought to bar partisan gerrymandering nationwide. It also would have banned mid-decade redistricting and set other national standards — and made it easier and faster for voters to win relief. The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would have strengthened protections against racially discriminatory maps. These landmark bills came achingly close to enactment in 2022. Together, they would stop what is happening today, cold.

National standards, like other reforms, do not flow from hazy idealism. They reflect a hard reality: Congress has the power to prohibit political abuse. President Biden did not press for these reforms until it was too late in his term. President Obama, too, did not demand action when he held power. This inaction reflected a repeated failure of imagination as well as will.

For too long, when it comes to protecting voters, to quote the poet William Butler Yeats, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

Those who want to undermine American democracy have shown that they will act with impunity. Those who profess to care about the law must respond with equal boldness. If they have the chance, they must act to unrig the system. While the Supreme Court helped get us into this mess, all eyes will be on Congress to get us out.


Michael Waldman is president of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.


Read More

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose
white red and blue textile

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose

As the United States approaches both a consequential election cycle and the 250th anniversary of its founding, Americans stand at a crossroads the framers anticipated but hoped we would never reach: a moment when citizens must decide whether to allow the Republic to erode or restore it through vigilance. This is not about left or right. It is about whether we still share a common vision of the country we want to be — and whether we still believe in the same Republic.

The Founders never imagined “the land of the free” as a place dependent on benevolent leaders. They built a system in which the people — not the government — were the safeguards against overreach. James Madison warned that “the accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” a reminder that freedom depends on restraint, not trust in any single individual. George Washington pledged that the Constitution would remain “the guide which I will never abandon,” signaling that loyalty to the Republic must always outweigh loyalty to any leader. These were not ceremonial lines. They were instructions — a blueprint for preventing institutional strain, polarization, and distrust we see today.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person holding a sign in front of the U.S. capitol that reads, "We The People."

The nation has reached a divide in the road—a moment when Americans must decide whether to accept a slow weakening of the Republic or insist on the principles that have held it together for more than two centuries

Getty Images

A Republic Under Strain—And a Choice Ahead

Americans feel something shifting beneath their feet — quieter than crisis but unmistakably a strain. Many live with a steady sense of uncertainty, conflict, and the emotional weight of issues that seem impossible to escape. They feel unheard, unsafe, or unsure whether the Republic they trust is fading. Friends, relatives, and former colleagues say they’ve tried to look away just to cope, hoping the turmoil will pass. And they ask the same thing: if the framers made the people the primary control on government, how will they help set the Republic back on a steadier path?

Understanding the strain Americans are experiencing is essential, but so is recognizing the choice we still have. Madison’s warning offers the answer the framers left us: when trust erodes and power concentrates, the Constitution turns back to the people—not as a slogan, but as a structural reality.

Keep ReadingShow less
Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on April 25, 2026, after the cancellation of the annual White House Correspondents Association Dinner.

Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

For the third time in three years, Donald Trump has come under threat by an attacker. Many facts remain unclear after a gunman stormed the Washington Hilton on April 25, 2026, during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

As the investigation into the shooting continues, Alfonso Serrano, The Conversation’s politics and society editor, spoke with James Piazza, a political violence scholar at Penn State, about what is driving the rise of political violence in the U.S. and what can be done about it.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democracy Requires Losing. Americans Are Forgetting That.
an american flag hanging from a pole in front of a building
Photo by Calysia Ramos on Unsplash

Democracy Requires Losing. Americans Are Forgetting That.

Americans believe in democracy. What they don’t believe in is losing.

That distinction matters. Democracy depends on its participants’ willingness to accept loss. Without that, elections stop resolving conflict and start producing it.

Keep ReadingShow less