The practice of redrawing voting districts to favor a particular political party or group has been a feature of American elections since the nation's founding, raising ongoing questions about legality and democratic integrity.
Redistricting occurs every 10 years following the census, with state legislatures or commissions drawing new district lines to reflect population shifts. Both Democratic and Republican parties have historically engaged in the practice, with critics arguing it undermines voter choice and supporters contending it is a legitimate political tool.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservatives and some Republican legal scholars contend that redistricting is a political question best left to state legislatures, arguing that courts should not intervene in what they see as ordinary political competition. The American Legislative Exchange Council has advocated for state-level redistricting reforms that preserve legislative authority over map-drawing.
Senator Mitch McConnell has defended Republican efforts on redistricting as standard political practice, noting that both parties engage in the practice when in power. Conservative commentators argue that accusations of gerrymandering are often overstated and that independent commissions can be equally susceptible to partisan bias.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive Democrats and voting rights advocates have pushed for independent redistricting commissions, arguing that partisan map-drawing suppresses minority votes and entrench incumbents. Organizations such as the Brennan Center for Justice have documented how gerrymandering can dilute minority voting power, particularly in Southern states with histories of discrimination.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has called for national standards on redistricting, stating that voters should choose their representatives rather than the other way around. Progressive groups argue that partisan redistricting disproportionately affects communities of color and low-income voters, undermining the principle of one person, one vote.
What the Numbers Show
Since 2010, 27 states have adopted some form of redistricting reform, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Eight states and Washington D.C. now use independent commissions for at least some congressional districts.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that federal courts do not have jurisdiction over partisan gerrymandering claims in Rucho v. Common Cause, effectively leaving the issue to states. However, the court has upheld provisions of the Voting Rights Act that prohibit racial gerrymandering.
In 2022, voters in five states considered redistricting reforms on the ballot, with mixed results. California and New York have both implemented commission-based systems in recent cycles, representing the two largest states by population.
The Bottom Line
The legality of redistricting for political purposes remains a complex landscape. While the Supreme Court has closed federal avenues for challenging partisan gerrymandering, state-level reforms continue to gain momentum. Both major parties have benefited from favorable district maps when in power, and the debate over how to balance political competition with voter representation remains unresolved. What to watch: state-level ballot initiatives in 2026 and pending court cases challenging specific district maps on voting rights grounds.