\n\t\t\t\t\t\tThe Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed California to use a new voter-approved congressional map that is favorable to Democrats in this year\u2019s elections, rejecting a last-ditch plea from state Republicans and the Trump administration.No justices dissented from the brief order denying the appeal without explanation, which is common on the court’s emergency docket.The justices had previously allowed Texas\u2019 Republican-friendly map to be used in 2026, despite a lower-court ruling that it likely discriminates on the basis of race.Conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote in December that it appeared both states had adopted new maps for political advantage, which the high court has previously ruled cannot be a basis for a federal lawsuit.Republicans, joined by the Trump administration, claimed the California map improperly relied on race as well. But a lower court disagreed by a 2-1 vote. The Justice Department and White House did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.The justices’ unsigned order keeps in place districts that are designed to flip up to five seats now held by Republicans, part of a tit-for-tat nationwide redistricting battle spurred by President Donald Trump, with control of Congress on the line in midterm elections.Last year, at Trump’s behest, Texas Republicans redid the state’s congressional districts with an eye on gaining five seats.California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is eyeing a 2028 presidential run, pledged to respond in kind, though he had to win over voters, not just lawmakers, to do so.Newsom celebrated the court’s decision, saying on social media that Trump had \u201cstarted this redistricting war\u201d and would end up losing out in the November midterms, when control of Congress is at stake.California’s attorney general, Democrat Rob Bonta, said the decision was \u201cgood news not only for Californians, but for our democracy.\u201dThe maps are set to be used for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections.The state Republican Party, which brought the case, and Dhillon Law Group attorney Michael Columbo released the following statement: \u201cThe federal district court applied a standard that would permit any state to use a racially gerrymandered election district map if the voters approved the map without knowing what their officials had done. This is a novel interpretation of the law that we believe is incorrect and dangerous. While the Supreme Court did not address this today and there won\u2019t be an emergency injunction to stop the Prop 50 maps from being used in this year\u2019s elections, our case persists and we will continue to vigorously argue for Equal Protection under the law for all of California\u2019s voters.\u201dOne longtime party strategist, Jon Fleishman, a former executive director of the California Republican Party, said in a post on X that the decision means \u201cthis year\u2019s elections will take place on the new lines shrinking the already very small Republican delegation from California.”Filing for congressional primaries in California begins on Monday.This story is developing. Stay with KCRA 3 for updates. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court<\/a> on Wednesday allowed California to use a new voter-approved congressional map<\/a> that is favorable to Democrats in this year\u2019s elections, rejecting a last-ditch plea from state Republicans and the Trump administration.<\/p>\n No justices dissented from the brief order denying the appeal without explanation, which is common on the court’s emergency docket.<\/p>\n The justices had previously allowed Texas\u2019 Republican-friendly map<\/a> to be used in 2026, despite a lower-court ruling that it likely discriminates on the basis of race.<\/p>\n Conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote in December that it appeared both states had adopted new maps for political advantage, which the high court has previously ruled cannot be a basis for a federal lawsuit.<\/p>\n Republicans, joined by the Trump administration, claimed the California map improperly relied on race as well. But a lower court disagreed by a 2-1 vote. The Justice Department and White House did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.<\/p>\n The justices’ unsigned order keeps in place districts that are designed to flip up to five seats now held by Republicans, part of a tit-for-tat nationwide redistricting battle spurred by President Donald Trump, with control of Congress on the line in midterm elections.<\/p>\n Last year, at Trump’s behest, Texas Republicans redid the state’s congressional districts<\/a> with an eye on gaining five seats.<\/p>\n California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is eyeing a 2028 presidential run<\/a>, pledged to respond in kind, though he had to win over voters, not just lawmakers, to do so.<\/p>\n Newsom celebrated the court’s decision, saying on social media that Trump had \u201cstarted this redistricting war\u201d and would end up losing out in the November midterms, when control of Congress is at stake.<\/p>\n \n\tThis content is imported from Twitter. Donald Trump said he was \u2018entitled\u2019 to five more Congressional seats in Texas. He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he\u2019ll lose again in November.<\/p>\n \u2014 Governor Gavin Newsom (@CAgovernor) February 4, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n California’s attorney general, Democrat Rob Bonta, said the decision was \u201cgood news not only for Californians, but for our democracy.\u201d<\/p>\n The maps are set to be used for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections.<\/p>\n The state Republican Party<\/a>, which brought the case, and Dhillon Law Group attorney Michael Columbo released the following statement: \u201cThe federal district court applied a standard that would permit any state to use a racially gerrymandered election district map if the voters approved the map without knowing what their officials had done. This is a novel interpretation of the law that we believe is incorrect and dangerous. While the Supreme Court did not address this today and there won\u2019t be an emergency injunction to stop the Prop 50 maps from being used in this year\u2019s elections, our case persists and we will continue to vigorously argue for Equal Protection under the law for all of California\u2019s voters.\u201d<\/p>\n One longtime party strategist, Jon Fleishman, a former executive director of the California Republican Party, said in a post on X that the decision means \u201cthis year\u2019s elections will take place on the new lines shrinking the already very small Republican delegation from California.”<\/p>\n \n\tThis content is imported from Twitter. I am deeply disappointed that the Supreme Court did not shut down this unconstitutional gerrymander of our congressional districts. Keeping these lines is unjust and robs rural Northern California of our representation. We will not take it sitting down. Now more than ever we\u2026<\/p>\n \u2014 James Gallagher (@J_GallagherAD3) February 4, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n Filing for congressional primaries in California begins on Monday.<\/p>\n This story is developing. Stay with KCRA 3 for updates. <\/p>\n See more coverage of top California stories here<\/a> | Download our app<\/a> | Subscribe to our morning newsletter<\/a> | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel<\/a><\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\tYou may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.\n<\/p>\n
\n\tYou may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.\n<\/p>\n