Supreme Court gives Texas the green light

[BluesLegend]

The Democrat Party's hate and racism has alienated mainstream Americans.
The Democrat Party's coalition of hate is shrinking, that is why they allowed 10 million third world people to illegally cross our border and loot the taxpayers.
People are disgusted with the Far Left attempting to turn America into a third world neo-marxist police state.

Actual Americans have no intention of becoming slaves on the Dem party's plantations. Plus we have had quite enough of their depraved left wing the sick bastards.

 

[Failzero]

The Democrat Party's hate and racism has alienated mainstream Americans.
The Democrat Party's coalition of hate is shrinking, that is why they allowed 10 million third world people to illegally cross our border and loot the taxpayers.
People are disgusted with the Far Left attempting to turn America into a third world neo-marxist police state.

10 Million ???

 

[struth]

Another win for the rule of law and our democracy and a big L for the demafasict assault on it

 

[Robert W]

No you can't, because it has been a long time since we caught democrats gerrymandering to disadvantage a race and getting called out for it in the courts.

You never try to catch Democrats poaching sites. TX did not change status of an area due to race. The Supreme court says this. TX determined 5 areas were actually republican areas based on voter's reports.

 

[ThisIsMe]

But is this cheating, yes or no?

Its doing exactly what other states have already done.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You never try to catch Democrats poaching sites.

What a bizarre post. I'm not a civil or voting rights lawyer. I will chalk this one up to starting early on the sauce on a Friday.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

TX did not change status of an area due to race. The Supreme court says this.

And educated people know that doesnt matter, when the evidence shows you did, and that this is part of why we passed the voting rights act.

 

[Robert W]

And educated people know that doesnt matter, when the evidence shows you did, and that this is part of why we passed the voting rights act.

Educated people know that TX changed the nature of the districts due to voters voting republican.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Educated people know that TX changed the nature of the districts due to voters voting republican.

And did so in a way that was clearly race based.

As all the evidence shows.

Thats not legal.

 

[Robert W]

What a bizarre post. I'm not a civil or voting rights lawyer. I will chalk this one up to starting early on the sauce on a Friday.

Why is that? You seem to love being wrong.

 

[Robert W]

And did so in a way that was clearly race based.

As all the evidence shows.

Thats not legal.

Are you saying minorities vote for republicans? If so, that part is true. What race are you talking about?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you saying minorities vote for republicans? If so, that part is true. What race are you talking about?

I'm not here for remedial education of posters running their mouths on topics they know nothing about. Sorry.

 

[Robert W]

I'm not here for remedial education of posters running their mouths on topics they know nothing about. Sorry.

Fine, I won't help you then.

 

[struth]

And educated people know that doesnt matter, when the evidence shows you did, and that this is part of why we passed the voting rights act.

Um the court reviews the evidence

Of course you demafasict have no respect for the rule of law, and our democratic process

 

[Crepitus]

Then you must really be pissed that California has millions of republicans not represented! The state of Massachusetts has 40% republican population yet not a single republican representative in government.

In most every state especially blue states, democrats only have what they got through lies and suppression.

Let me know when you go on the warpath to right these inequities.

Nah, that doesn't bother me at all.

 

[Nostra]

The real justification, or the embarrassing horseshit one the corrupt SCOTUS will invent out of thin air?

We all know the REAL justification.

Folks, we get three more years of these meltdowns.

 

[Nobody911]

It’s uncertain — several realistic paths exist. The Court’s emergency stay lets the 2026 elections use the new map while litigation continues, but the underlying constitutional challenge is unresolved and could still succeed or fail on final review.

Key factors and likely scenarios

- Immediate effect: The stay means Texas can use the 2025 map for primaries and the 2026 general election unless the Supreme Court or a lower court later orders otherwise. That increases the chance Republicans pick up seats in 2026, but it’s not guaranteed.

- Possible ultimate outcomes
1. Supreme Court affirms the stay and rules for Texas on the merits — the map remains permanent and the partisan gains stand.
2. Supreme Court reverses the stay on final review, finds racial gerrymandering, and orders remedial lines — some (or all) seat flips could be undone, potentially changing 2026 results retrospectively or requiring special remedies for later elections.
3. The Court sends the case back to the lower court for further fact-finding or a narrower remedy — a mixed outcome that could preserve some districts while ordering adjustments.
4. Settlement or state remedial action before final resolution — legislators could redraw lines or courts could impose an alternative map that mitigates partisan effects.

- How the Court’s composition and opinions matter
- The unsigned majority stay and Alito concurrence signal a conservative-leaning majority skeptical of the lower court’s factual findings and concerned about federal courts intervening close to elections.
- The three liberal justices’ dissent emphasizes deference to district-court factfinding on race and signals they would block the map.
- Final outcome will hinge on how the justices evaluate

(a) whether race, not politics, was the predominant motive
(b) the factual record established by the district court.
(c) equitable concerns about disrupting elections.

- Timing and practicalities
- The Court may wait to take the full case on the merits or resolve it next Term; that timeline can keep the map in use for 2026 even if the map is later struck down.
- Remedies can be slow and messy; courts sometimes order use of contested maps for an election if replacement maps can’t be drawn in time, then require changes afterward.

Bottom line: The stay gives Texas a big short-term advantage (likely boosting GOP chances in 2026), but the constitutional question remains live. The final legal outcome depends on record-based findings about motive and causation and on how the Supreme Court’s majority balances election-timing equities against constitutional protections.

sources:

• Supreme Court allows Texas to use redistricting map challenged as racially discriminatory
• https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/04/supreme-court-revives-pro-republican-texas-voting-map.html

 

[Missouri_Mike]

This is yet another disgraceful decision by the corrupt Roberts court that is also another nail in the coffin, for the Voting Rights Act.

Which, make no mistake, was part of the reason Republicans brought this fight.

We long ago figured out that racial gerrymandering, even IF done to achieve partisan advantage, is not okay. Whether you meant to be racist or not, too bad, find another way.

The conservatives ignored this. Their entire opinion amounted to, "Nuh uh, it was clearly done for partisan advantage only, and that's that." This is a stunning rebuke of the mountain of precedent and hard fought law on disallowing racial bias in gerrymandering, regardless of intent.

Then they chastised the lower court for rendering the decision just weeks before candidates are due to declare for a primary, marking a year long blackout period which, in general, covers at least 50% of our time on this planet, apparently. But no mention of the redistricting just months before an election.

This court gave to itself the power of the district court without presenting any clear error in the reasoning of the district court. This is not a normal Supreme Court.

When is the last time you heard democrats saying they had to gerrymander for a black district? Like yesterday? The racism has been the given reason for Democrat gerrymandering for years. They actually said so at every opportunity. So that pretty much shits on your entire complaint.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

You also just gave California and Virginia the green light to do the same. You guys are stealing democracy from millions of people in this country for what? A result that will now basically be a wash and you'll still lose the House anyway.

You can’t ******* gerrymander California for democrats any more than it already is. They did it years ago. Only now you think it’s a problem?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Texas​

Texas is set to gain four new congressional seats after the 2030 census due to significant population growth. This growth is primarily driven by a large increase in residents of color, particularly Hispanics, who have accounted for a substantial portion of the state's population growth since 2010. The state's political clout is expected to continue growing, with the potential for Texas to gain four seats, making it one of the largest congressional delegations in the U.S..

That does not dispute nor confirm what was stated.