Analysis: DOJ sues California over constitutional amendment in latest redistricting salvo

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a lawsuit against the state of California over the passage of a constitutional amendment that it argues unconstitutionally gerrymanders congressional districts.

The move by the Trump administration is just the latest in a long-running struggle between Republicans and Democrats over control of the U.S. House in 2026.

Known as Proposition 50, the California amendment institutes temporary congressional maps widely seen as helping Democrats secure another five seats in Congress, while wresting power away from an independent commission appointed to draw bipartisan representation.

Attorney General Pamela Bondi called California’s plan “a brazen power grab” by Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The DOJ added its legal reasoning aligns with a recent U.S. Supreme Court hearing suggesting race-based congressional apportionment could be unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling early next year before the primary calendar begins. 

“Race cannot be used as a proxy to advance political interests, but that is precisely what the California General Assembly did with Prop 50,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Jesus Osete in a statement. “Californians were sold an illegal, racially gerrymandered map, but the U.S. Constitution prohibits its use in 2026 and beyond.” 

The DOJ contends evidence in the California legislative record, and in lawmakers’ public statements, shows the state Legislature drew the new map approved under Proposition 50 with racial considerations as predominant factors. 

The California amendment and the DOJ’s response reflect Republican and Democrat efforts to pick up extra seats in the 2026 midterms. 

On the face of it, the Democrats only need to take five seats to reclaim the House. The GOP currently holds a 219-214 advantage. 

But the midterm mathematics is a lot more difficult for Democrats than Republicans.  

Democrats will be defending more seats than the GOP, according to the Cook Political Report. 

Even if the Supreme Court ultimately favors the map approved under Proposition 50, GOP-led states including Texas, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, Louisiana, Alabama and Arizona can redraw maps in ways that offset Democrat gains in California. 

Illinois appears less likely to redistrict, while the new Democrat majority in Virginia is more likely to redistrict, according to the New York Times. 

That would give Democrats nine of the 11 seats in Virginia’s U.S. House delegation – a pick-up of two seats, said the Times. 

Ironically, some Democrats are pointing out attempts to expand the number of liberal seats will weaken the power of black voters, extending the districts into areas that are traditionally more white and more conservative. 

Illinois state Sen. Willie Preston, who also chairs the Illinois Senate Black Legislative Caucus, told Axios he’s worried about eroding black political power. 

With Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Utah and California already having redistricting plans in place for 2026, a review of the maps by The Lion shows the GOP will likely net two seats when including California’s recent moves. 

That, however, is just an estimate because elections are the final arbiter of which party controls the maps. 

Adding to the uncertainty, if the Supreme Court tightens the rules on race-based redistricting, a flurry of lawsuits challenging districts nationwide is likely to follow. 

Plaintiffs would then argue, as in the California case, the districts were drawn primarily for racial representation. 

In some ways, it will be a replay of Students for Fair Admissions vs. UNC, a decision in 2023 where the Supreme Court ruled a university violated the Constitution by considering race as a primary factor in admissions. 

The university’s open, public embrace of diversity, equity and inclusion policies (DEI) favoring black applicants over Asian applicants became a key factor in the Court’s decision to end race-based admissions. 

The DOJ argues states likewise cannot use race-based decision-making in drawing district maps. 

“The U.S. Department of Justice is moving swiftly to prevent these illegal maps from tainting our upcoming elections,” said Assistant United States Attorney Bill Essayli. “California is free to draw congressional maps, but they may not be drawn based on race.”