The Supreme Court last week ordered California Democrats to respond within a week to a Republican-backed request seeking to block the state’s newly drawn congressional maps from being used in the 2026 elections.
The move, issued by Justice Elena Kagan, who is handling the emergency injunction request, caught many court watchers off guard. Given the court’s recent decision to allow Texas Republicans to keep their mid-decade redistricting plan, most expected the justices to let California’s Democrat-drawn map stand without intervention.
California Republicans argue the new maps violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution by relying on race, rather than politics, to redraw at least one congressional district.
The California Republican Party, joined by the Justice Department, filed the emergency application Tuesday, asking the high court to block the maps, which could threaten four to six Republican-held seats.
The request does not guarantee the Supreme Court will take up the case. The justices are already considering a high-profile voting rights dispute out of Louisiana that could influence how the court views California’s map. Arguments in Louisiana v. Callais wrapped up in October, and a ruling is expected soon.
That case centers on whether Louisiana’s 2024 congressional map, which added a second majority-Black district, amounts to unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.
Mark Meuser, an election law attorney with the Dhillon Law Group who filed the challenge on behalf of California Republicans, welcomed Kagan’s order requiring a response by Jan. 29.
🚨Today, we filed an Emergency Application with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging California’s new congressional map enacted through Proposition 50.
This filing asks the Court to temporarily block California from using the Proposition 50 map in the 2026 elections while the case… pic.twitter.com/t0I8IrZQLp
— Mark Meuser (@MarkMeuser) January 20, 2026
“Supreme Court just ordered California to respond to our Emergency Application for an Injunction,” Meuser wrote in a post on X. “California must respond by Jan. 29.”
In a brief supporting the GOP challenge, Solicitor General John Sauer argued that the California map crosses a constitutional line.
“California’s recent redistricting is tainted by an unconstitutional racial gerrymander,” Sauer wrote.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly allowed partisan gerrymandering, including last month when it let Texas Republicans proceed with a map designed to gain additional GOP seats. But the court has been far less tolerant of redistricting plans driven primarily by race.
“But unlike Texas’s map, the California map suffers from a fatal constitutional flaw: one of the districts (District 13) was clearly drawn ‘on the basis of race,’” Sauer wrote.
California Republicans asked the justices to rule on their injunction request by Feb. 9, the date congressional candidate filing opens in the state. They also urged the court to schedule oral arguments on the broader legal challenge.
Democrats, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, openly pitched the new map as a counterpunch to Republican redistricting efforts in Texas, hoping to net as many as five additional Democratic seats.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and political arms tied to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries hired consultant Paul Mitchell to redraw California’s 52 districts. Newsom then called a special election last November, asking voters to approve the plan.
The ballot measure, Proposition 50, passed with 64% of the vote.
Newsom did not directly address Kagan’s order Thursday but used social media to frame the fight as a political showdown.
“Donald Trump called up Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and demanded more MAGA seats in Congress,” Newsom wrote on X from Davos, Switzerland. “He thought we’d be good little Democrats and respond with an op-ed. Not this time, buddy.”
“I’m not naïve. These guys are going to try to take me down, not just my state,” Newsom said separately during an interview at the international economic summit.
Earlier this month, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California rejected the GOP’s claims and refused to block the map.
“Challengers now seek to enjoin California’s use of the Proposition 50 Map, arguing that the predominant reason for its adoption was not politics but rather unconstitutional and unlawful racial gerrymandering,” the judges wrote.
After reviewing extensive evidence and testimony, the panel concluded Republicans failed to prove their case.
“We find that the challengers have failed to show that racial gerrymandering occurred, and we conclude that there is no basis for issuing a preliminary injunction.”
Download the FREE Trending Politics App to get the latest news FIRST >>
