In addition to lifting Democrats’ spirits, last week’s elections, in which the party beat expectations and regained much of the support among young and nonwhite voters that it had lost in 2024, changed the calculus for what may become one of the defining fights of the second Trump presidency: the so-called redistricting war.
What is this war about? It’s a fight over determining whether, when, and how state lawmakers can redraw the districts that determine which party wins a seat in the House of Representatives — and thus influence the overall balance of power in the lower house of Congress.
The stakes are high. Republicans face headwinds in holding onto control of the House next year, and reanimated Democratic voters could deliver a 2018-style wave by winning the national popular vote. But Republican redraws could foil that, and with that, spoil the chance that Democrats finally get a check on Trump’s power.
How is redistricting supposed to work?
Traditionally, congressional maps are set by states every 10 years, after the US Census finishes its count of the American population. Every decade, therefore, district maps, designed by either state legislatures or independent commissions, are supposed to be updated to:
-
Better represent changing demographics and minority groups. Representatives should represent similar numbers of voters, for the sake of representative democracy.
- Keep like voters in the same district as like voters. Splintering voters off into far-flung districts diminishes the power of minority groups and hurts fair representation.
-
Ensure voters get a chance to vote for the party they want. Competitive seats give voters that chance to make a real choice in who they want to elect, instead of casting a futile vote in a noncompetitive race.
What changed?
Over the last few decades, political “gerrymandering” — the selective drawing of districts to benefit one party over another — has been slowly but steadily increasing. It was in 2025, though, that the intensity of this process got kicked up to a whole new level.
The chief reason for this, unsurprisingly, is the commander-in-chief: beginning in July, President Donald Trump began urging Republican-run states to redraw their maps early — before next year’s midterm elections — to give Republicans a boost ahead of 2026. His demands had focused on Texas and Ohio, but similar efforts have been made in Missouri and North Carolina, too.
Democrats, meanwhile, have been slower to respond — in part, no doubt, because their traditional stance on gerrymandering has been to oppose it outright, rather than try to beat Republicans at their own game — but, in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling that made installing “fair maps” even more politically difficult than it was already, and in response to Trump and the Republicans’ escalations, they, too, are now engaging in this political arms race.
And yet, Democrats, who have long been the champions of independent redistricting and anti-gerrymandering and corruption reforms, argue that the Trump era is forcing them to break these norms too. In California, for example, Gov. Gavin Newsom framed his side’s U-turn on gerrymandering as a necessity. “California has walked the walk on independent redistricting at the state level for 15 years. But we cannot unilaterally disarm while other states throw out the rules to gain power,” he said in August, as Texas continued its efforts and he advanced a referendum in California to counter. “With one vote, Californians can punch back and also demand nationwide independent redistricting.” His side ended up winning that vote by more than 2 million votes.
Read the rest of Christian's story on Vox.com to learn what's changed, where things stand now, and what could still change.
