Federal Court Finds Texas Political Map Discriminated Against Minorities, Again

It’s the fourth finding of discrimination in nine days.

Texas state Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa looks at maps on display prior to a Senate redistricting committee hearing in 2013. Eric Gay/AP

The state of Texas is on an impressive losing streak in court. On Thursday evening, a three-judge panel of a federal district court in San Antonio found that the state House district map purposefully undercut the voting power of African American and Latino voters—the ninth racial discrimination case the state has lost since 2011 and the fourth in just over a week.

The ruling comes nine days after the same court found that another Texas district map, for its representatives in Congress, discriminated against minorities and ordered the state to redraw two districts. But rather than redraw the congressional and state House maps, Texas is appealing to the US Supreme Court to preserve them.

The ruling Thursday evening was the latest episode in a six-year battle over political maps drawn in 2011. In 2013, with the maps tied up in court, the state Legislature adopted new congressional and state House maps based on the 2011 maps; those maps have been in place ever since. The San Antonio court struck down both the 2011 maps and the 2013 congressional map this year as intentionally discriminatory. On Thursday, the court found that the Republican-dominated Legislature “purposefully maintained the intentional discrimination” from the 2011 map in drawing four state House districts.

While Texas appeals the rulings, the parties are due back in court in early September to begin to redraw the maps ahead of the 2018 elections. New maps would likely reduce the size of the Republican majority in the state Legislature and Texas’ congressional delegation.

But the bigger question looming over Texas is whether, after the state racked up nine findings of discrimination in six years, courts will decide to place Texas once again under federal supervision, forcing all changes to election laws to be pre-approved by the federal government. Texas and eight other states with a history of discrimination, in addition to a number of cities and counties, were subject to “preclearance” under the 1965 Voting Rights Act until 2013, when the Supreme Court gutted the law. But the Supreme Court did not remove the ability of federal courts to place jurisdictions back under federal oversight if there is a finding of intentional discrimination. In Texas, there are nine.


In 2014, before Donald Trump announced his run for president, we knew we had to do something different to address the fundamental challenge facing journalism: how hard-hitting reporting that can hold the powerful accountable can survive as the bottom falls out of the news business.

Being a nonprofit, we started planning The Moment for Mother Jones, a special campaign to raise $25 million for key investments to make Mother Jones the strongest watchdog it can be. Five years later, readers have stepped up and contributed an astonishing $23 million in gifts and future pledges. This is an incredible statement from the Mother Jones community in the face of huge threats—both economic and political—against the free press.

Read more about The Moment and see what we've been able to accomplish thanks to readers' incredible generosity so far, and please join them today. Your gift will be matched dollar for dollar, up to $500,000 total, during this critical moment for journalism.

We Recommend


Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.


Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.


We have a new comment system! We are now using Coral, from Vox Media, for comments on all new articles. We'd love your feedback.