Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Worst Gerrymandered States Face Showdown as Indiana Republicans Defy Trump’s Redistricting Plan

From Indiana to Texas, redistricting fights intensify as gerrymandering threatens voter trust and determines congressional power ahead of the 2026 elections.


Opinion

Anti-gerrymandering protest
Anti-gerrymandering protest
Sarah L. Voisin/Getty Images

In July of 2025, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled Worst Gerrymandered States Face Redistricting Showdown As Trump Pressures Texas. At the time, President Donald Trump was actively urging Texas lawmakers to redraw congressional districts, escalating what has become a national showdown over electoral fairness.

Texas already ranked among the worst offenders in the country, as The Fulcrum reported in December 2024, with two of its congressional maps serving as textbook examples of manipulated representation.


Today, with the 2026 midterm elections less than a year away, we revisit this critically important battle—one that may determine who controls Congress for the final two years of Trump’s presidency.

Our review highlights six states currently at the center of redistricting fights:

Indiana

  • December 11th brought a dramatic turn in Indiana, where Senate Republicans rejected President Trump’s push for mid‑decade redistricting. The GOP‑controlled chamber voted 31–19 against a Trump‑backed map that would have dismantled the state’s two Democratic districts and added two safe Republican seats.
  • The defeat marks the first major rebuke of Trump’s national redistricting campaign by his own party. Despite weeks of intense lobbying from Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and House Speaker Mike Johnson, Indiana Republicans broke ranks. Several lawmakers cited conservative principles against mid‑cycle gerrymandering, warning that such moves erode public trust and invite federal overreach.
  • The vote followed weeks of turmoil: at least a dozen Indiana Republicans reported violent threats, swatting attempts, and bomb scares tied to the redistricting debate. Trump responded by vowing to back primary challengers against dissenters, singling out Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray.
  • This rejection not only halts GOP hopes of gaining two additional seats in Indiana but also underscores fractures within the party over Trump’s aggressive redistricting strategy.

Ohio

  • Ohio continues to operate under maps repeatedly ruled unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court in 2021–22.
  • More than 535,000 signatures were submitted this summer to place Issue 1 on the November ballot, which would replace the politician-controlled redistricting commission with a citizens’ commission.
  • In October, the Ohio Redistricting Commission began debating new maps, but partisan gridlock persists. Republicans may seek to expand their current 10–5 advantage in U.S. House seats, though details remain uncertain.

Florida

  • In December, the Florida House opened hearings to redraw congressional maps, despite Gov. Ron DeSantis suggesting a delay until spring 2026.
  • The Florida Supreme Court upheld the current GOP-favored map (20–8 split) this past summer, weakening voter-approved anti-gerrymandering protections.
  • Republicans hope to gain 3–5 additional seats before the midterms, but Florida’s constitutional ban on partisan gerrymandering casts doubt on the outcome.

Utah

  • In August, a judge reinstated Proposition 4, the voter-approved anti-gerrymandering initiative, and imposed a new map that could create a Democratic-leaning district in Salt Lake County.
  • The ruling sparked significant legislative backlash. In December, GOP lawmakers delayed candidate filing deadlines, condemned the judiciary, and prepared appeals to the Utah Supreme Court.
  • Grassroots petition drives to repeal Prop 4 have fueled controversy, with reports of out-of-state petitioners stranded and unpaid.

Wisconsin

  • In late 2025, the liberal-majority Wisconsin Supreme Court appointed three-judge panels to hear lawsuits challenging the current congressional map.
  • Republicans currently hold a 6–2 advantage in U.S. House seats, but this balance could shift dramatically depending on the court’s rulings.
  • GOP lawmakers are fighting to dismiss the lawsuits, arguing the maps are constitutional, while Democrats hope for new maps before the 2026 elections.

The Larger Danger

The dangers of gerrymandering remain profound. This is not merely a turf war between parties—it is an erosion of public trust. When only 10–15% of congressional districts are competitive, as in the 119th Congress, the result is a landscape where 370 to 390 seats are virtual locks for one party. That’s roughly 85–90% of the House.

In noncompetitive districts, general elections become perfunctory. Real contests occur in primaries, often shaped by low turnout and ideological extremism. Voters outside the dominant party feel powerless, their ballots reduced to symbolic gestures.

At its core, gerrymandering is about control. When both parties manipulate district lines to preserve power, voters lose their voice. If our democracy is to endure, we must confront the consequences of a system where representation is predetermined and competition is the exception.

David Nevins is the publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.


Read More

Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test
white and black labeled box

Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test

The Supreme Court closed out its term and issued decisions that could affect millions of Americans. Among them is Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which the court decided in a 5-4 decision to uphold longstanding Mississippi law and allow mail-in ballots received post-Election Day to be counted.

The legal implications of the decision will be analyzed for months, if not years. But beyond the legal questions is a practical one: What role does mail voting actually play in helping Americans participate in elections?

Keep ReadingShow less
The New Fight Over Election Observation
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

The New Fight Over Election Observation

As a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the U.S. has signed the foundational agreement committing all participating states to open elections to external scrutiny and inviting fellow members to observe through the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). The 2024 ODIHR observation mission to the U.S. found the fundamentals reassuring—a well-run process, active engagement, free campaigning—but issued 31 recommendations to align U.S. elections with international standards and commitments. Four stand out: federal pre-clearance legislation against discriminatory election-law changes; reassessing the Electoral College; balanced representation in election administration; and guaranteed access for international and nonpartisan observers—notable, since 17 states still legally bar international observation, which is at odds with commitments made by all 57 OSCE states. Yet over a year later, follow-through is thin: no pre-clearance restoration, no Electoral College review, unchanged observer-access laws. Where movement exists—in disinformation tools, in financial disclosure—it remains piecemeal.

An uncomfortable convergence

Keep ReadingShow less
Aspirations for the American Experiment Versus the Save Act of 2026
a person is casting a vote into a box

Aspirations for the American Experiment Versus the Save Act of 2026

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act stands as the direct antithesis of our founders' aspirations for the American Experiment, eroding the core principles of popular sovereignty and individual liberty. Rather than cultivating a government that derives its "just powers from the consent of the governed," this legislative measure inverts that relationship. It transforms a natural right into a government-administered privilege, erecting bureaucratic barriers that conflict with the expansive, participatory democratic republic the Framers sought to construct.

Subverting the Consent of the Governed: the foundational premise of the American Experiment, as articulated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, is that the legitimacy of a government hinges entirely on the active consent of its citizens. The SAVE Act disrupts this dynamic by fundamentally shifting the burden of proof.

Keep ReadingShow less
10 Organizations Independent Voters Need to Watch

Young woman at voting booth

Canva

10 Organizations Independent Voters Need to Watch

Independent voters are no longer a political afterthought. They are the majority.

And when these voters look at the state of politics in the US, they see the lack of accountability, representation, competition, and meaningful choice that the system produces.

Keep ReadingShow less