The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday granted Republicans a significant boost in the ongoing battle over congressional boundaries, issuing a summary reversal that allows Texas to proceed with its 2025 mid-decade congressional map for the November 2026 elections.
In the case, Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, the justices overturned a federal district court’s earlier injunction against the new boundaries. The majority referenced its own prior opinion from late 2025 in the same litigation, while Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson noted their disagreement with the outcome.
The Texas map, redrawn by the Republican-led legislature last year, had faced challenges from voting-rights organizations that claimed it improperly relied on race. A lower court had blocked its implementation in November 2025, but the Supreme Court had previously paused that order to let primaries move forward.
In a separate but related development playing out the same day, a Virginia state court delivered a win for Democrats on Sunday by rejecting a Republican-led challenge to a newly approved congressional map.
Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland turned down a last-minute bid by the Republican National Committee, the state GOP, and other plaintiffs seeking to halt certification of results from a voter referendum held the previous week. That ballot measure narrowly passed a set of new district lines drawn by Democratic lawmakers.
The judge emphasized that courts do not weigh in on the merits of policy choices but instead check whether elected officials followed constitutional rules. He found they had done so here. While acknowledging that the updated districts are less compact than before and reflect partisan considerations, Thorne-Begland concluded the question of compactness was open to reasonable debate after reviewing competing expert testimony, including from Boston University political scientist Maxwell Palmer.
Virginia’s current congressional delegation holds a 6-5 Democratic majority. The new configuration, if it survives final review, would expand that edge to 10-1 and create up to four additional competitive opportunities for Democrats in the fall midterms.
Plaintiffs had argued the map violated state constitutional standards and lacked proper legal authority when enacted. The judge, however, determined they were unlikely to succeed on the core claims at this stage.
The Virginia Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments later Monday on separate but overlapping questions about the legality of the referendum process and timing.
* * *
