When John Adams outlined his vision of a representative assembly that would make laws for the developing republic in 1776, he stated it “must be in miniature, an accurate portrait of the people as a whole.”
Since then, the question of how exactly to elect people's representatives to the elected body of the United States, Congress, has been the subject of debate. One founder, James Madison, I almost lost my place in the first Congress due to a rival's involvement in the design of Madison County. Today, the political landscape is dominated by redrawing the map of Congress in favor of a particular party or candidate, known as gerrymandering. President Donald Trump kicked off the current partisan battle by encouraging his allies in state legislatures to rework maps ahead of the usual schedule for redistricting in favor of Republicans, prompting a counter-effort among Democratic lawmakers.
Gerrymandering is expected to remain a focus as redistricting efforts face legal challenges and politicians maneuver to position their parties ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. On November 18, a panel of federal judges blocked new Texas congressional maps. painted in Augustclaiming they had been subjected to racial fraud. Unlike partisan gerrymandering, redistricting along racial lines is illegal. The State of Texas appealed to the Supreme Court. (The High Court will manage this term in a separate case that could lead to significant partisan redistricting if a key provision of the Voting Rights Act is overturned.)
Why did we write this
Attempts to control congressional districts in favor of a party or candidate have been going on almost since the founding of the country. This year's surge in redistricting has sparked new interest in what gerrymandering is and how it works.
The lawsuit also challenges California's new congressional maps. Voters this month temporarily suspended the state's independent redistricting commission. cards add five Democratic House seats to the state delegation. The Justice Department says the new districts are based on race.
Mr. Trump continues to call on Republicans at the state level to redraw their maps. This week he sharply criticized GOP lawmakers in Indiana, which abandoned redistricting efforts. Six states have changed their congressional maps this year, and at least seven others have considered it. in accordance with The National Conference of State Legislatures notes that states have been redistricting this year “at a pace not seen since the 1800s.”
Here's the history of this centuries-old practice, how it works, and why it remains a controversial part of U.S. politics.
What are the origins of gerrymandering?
The term “gerrymandering” originated in Massachusetts in 1812. Then-Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a bill authorizing the redrawing of state congressional districts to ensure his party, the Democratic Republicans, would retain power in future elections.
Boston newspaper coined the termpairing the governor's last name with criticism that the new (and strangely drawn) counties resemble a salamander. Jerry did not win re-election that year. However, his manipulation of the map allowed Democratic-Republicans to gain 29 of the 40 seats in the legislature.
Although gerrymandering and redistricting are similar, they are different. Redistricting is required every decade under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution to ensure that congressional districts keep up with population changes. Gerrymandering is a form of redistricting to benefit one candidate or party.
How was gerrymandering used in the USA?
There are two main methods by which gerrymandering can help influence election results: packing and hacking.
Packing is when supporters of a party or individual politician are concentrated in a centralized space. The hack occurs in reverse: voters are scattered across several constituencies with the intention of weakening the influence of the opposition party.
Gerrymandering also developed in the 19th century. Following the Civil War and the passage of the 15th Amendment, which guaranteed black men the right to vote, a violent era of gerrymandering began. In Southern states, it became a tactic of racial oppression until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibited states from discriminating on the basis of race during redistricting.
Other notable examples of gerrymandering include the 1990s redrawing of North Carolina's 12th Congressional District, known as the “I-85 District” because of its line that almost exactly parallels the interstate, and Maryland's 3rd Congressional District, nicknamed the “Mantis” in the 2010s.
In recent decades, advances in technology have created new methods for state legislators to draw lines based on voting data and mapping software after creating thousands of potential maps. “The computer became an integral part of the gerrymander,” says Nancy Beck Young, a historian at the University of Houston.
What efforts have been made to combat gerrymandering?
While most states leave redistricting in the hands of politicians, some have made efforts to shift control of the process to more neutral hands. In 2000, Arizona was one of the first states Create an independent citizens commission to help redraw state legislative districts.
Today, seven states According to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, use such commissions to redraw congressional districts (with a temporary hold in California).
Prior to these efforts, a series of cases were brought before the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1960s to combat gerrymandering in the so-called “redistribution revolution.”
The landmark 1962 Supreme Court decision in Baker v. Carr allowed federal courts to intervene in disputes over state appointments. This was followed in 1964 by Wesberry v. Sanders, which established that congressional districts should be drawn with roughly equal populations, using the phrase “one person, one vote.” That same year, Reynolds v. Sims required state legislatures to be proportional to population.
The Voting Rights Act has been used successfully in anti-gerrymandering efforts, such as in 1984 when a panel of federal judges ruled North Carolina's redistricting process discriminated against black voters.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, the essence of the Voting Rights Act is that was Section 5 — which provided that, in certain jurisdictions, proposed voting changes must be approved by the Department of Justice or the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and ensured that the changes would not be discriminatory.
Section 5 and part of Section 4 of the law were struck down by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013. The ruling effectively ended the federal pre-approval process for states proposing jurisdictional plans that could be challenged as discriminatory.
Based on the legal basis of this ruling, the Supreme Court intends to decide on Louisiana v. Calle by June. If the judges decide the case ahead of schedule, it could start a fight as states rush to redistrict ahead of next year's midterm elections.
The case concerns Section 2, a core aspect of the Voting Rights Act that has protected minorities since the court's 2013 decision, because it prohibits election rules or practices that may deny or limit the voting rights of minorities. After the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Louisiana v. Calle last month, many court observers expect the justices narrow section 2. The government argues that the Voting Rights Act was not meant to last indefinitely and that using race to gerrymander violates the 14th and 15th Amendments.
Regarding partisan gerrymandering, the Supreme Court's 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause ruled that federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear claims of partisan gerrymandering, leaving the decision up to the states.
