logo
The Difference Between Gerrymandering and Redistricting

The Difference Between Gerrymandering and Redistricting

Yahoo3 days ago
Organizations and individuals gather outside the Supreme Court as gerrymandering cases are argued on Tuesday, March 26, 2019. Credit - Aurora Samperio—Getty Images
Texas Republicans are poised to consider new districts in a special session after President Donald Trump called for the state to redraw its congressional map to allow for the GOP to pick up seats in the midterm elections in 2026.
Trump told reporters that there are several states in which he believes Republicans can redraw districts in order to pick up seats in Congress and keep a narrow majority.
'Texas would be the biggest one,' he said on July 16. 'Just a very simple redrawing, we pick up five seats.'
Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott put redistricting on his special session agenda for Monday. The issue is firmly on the minds of Texas Republicans and Democrats, alike. Abbott said his decision was in light of a letter he received from the Department of Justice earlier this month. The letter alleges that four of the current districts were racial gerrymanders that violate the Constitution's 14th Amendment, thus opening the door for redistricting as a whole to be decided.
Typically, states redraw their congressional district maps every ten years to accommodate shifts in population. But in many states, lawmakers have taken to changing the lines whenever they see it as politically advantageous to help their party gain an advantage."
The fact that Trump and Texas Republicans are currently weighing their options of redistricting in the middle of a decade is non-traditional, but not completely unheard of. But the move has, unsurprisingly, raised concerns and discussions about gerrymandering.
Read More: To End Gerrymandering, Change How We Elect Congress
California Gov. Gavin Newsom of the Democratic Party has vowed to retaliate by redistricting his own state's 52 seats to pick up more Democratic representation.
'Trump said he's going to steal five Congressional seats in Texas and gerrymander his way into a 2026 win. Well, two can play that game,' Newsom said via X on July 15. 'Special sessions. Special elections. Ballot initiatives. New laws. It's all on the table when democracy is on the line.'
Beyond any potential retaliation, Republicans risk a lot in redistricting, says Jay Dow, a professor of political science at the University of Missouri.
'If you cut [the margins] too thin, you can really put your own party in danger,' Dow notes. 'If you make those margins too thin and you have a bad year, you can end up losing four or five seats instead of gaining them.'
This can be referred to as a 'dummymander.'
Ismar Volić, a professor at Wellesley College who has done research on how mathematics can equalize redistricting, argues that Trump's attitude towards redistricting points to how 'okay everyone is' with partisan gerrymandering.
'The courts say this is politics as usual,' he says. 'Anyone who cares about some kind of fairness, representation, or competitiveness in our democracy would think it's terrible that the President is so open about it. But it's not illegal.'
Here is what you need to know about redistricting and gerrymandering, and the difference.
What is redistricting?
Redistricting is a process of drawing the borders of districts for which representatives are elected. As states grow, they often do not grow evenly, and thus redistricting allows for states to represent population growth and racial diversity in their cities—according to the Constitution, all districts in a state must have equal population.
'We reapportion the House seats in response to the census, and so every 10 years we do the census, and that changes the number of House seats. Some states get more, some states get fewer because of internal shifts in population,' explains Dow. 'Now, the legislature will have to draw the boundaries of these districts to reflect that.'
Often, this can reflect people moving from rural areas to urban areas, or from state to state.
For example, as a result of the 2020 Census, Florida gained a seat in the House, while states including California and Illinois lost a seat.
Read More: Gerrymandering Isn't New—But Now We Have a Solution
What is gerrymandering?
According to Richard Briffault, a professor at Columbia Law School, gerrymandering is a "pejorative" for a kind of redistricting that favors a political party, or in some cases, looks to disenfranchise a group of people.
There are two principle ways that a legislature can gerrymander for partisan purposes, says Briffault. Packing and cracking.
'With packing, you put as many of the voters of the other party into one district. Instead of the voters being equally spread around so they get an influence on a lot of places, they are in one district,' Briffault says.
Whereas with cracking, those creating maps would split a voting bloc—be that a specific party affiliation or a certain demographic—across multiple districts to dilute voting power, making it difficult for them to elect their preferred candidates.
Briffault says in a scenario where Republicans would try to use cracking in a district with a lot of Democrats, they could 'carve it up into multiple districts and make [Democrats] the minority in several other districts, so that they're dispersed and they're never going to be the dominant force in any one district.'
There are several tells, Briffault says, that a district has been gerrymandered. But it tends to be a hard legal battle as it's not always clear-cut. In fact, courts will often disagree on whether a district has been gerrymandered.
First, Briffault says that if the process is done entirely by one party with no input from another party, it is more likely to be gerrymandering. If it is done mid-cycle, rather than based on new population data, then that's another warning sign. Lastly, experts recommend looking to the shape of the states. Districts drawn with 'odd shapes' to capture some 'small group' is also 'evidence of gerrymandering,' according to Briffault.
Recognizing the difference between partisan and racial gerrymandering
Experts emphasize the difference in legality between partisan gerrymandering and racial gerrymandering.
The Supreme Court ruled in the 2019 case 'Rucho v. Common Cause' that partisan gerrymandering is not subject to a federal court review, because they present non-'justiciable' political questions that lie outside of the court's jurisdiction.
'In a handful of states, there are limits on gerrymandering, or there are special procedures for redistricting that make gerrymandering more difficult, but as a matter of federal law, the Supreme Court said it's not unconstitutional,' Briffault says.
Volić calls this court case a 'watershed' moment in redistricting. As such, people trying to detect partisan gerrymandering can 'only rely on' state supreme court or state judicial systems. He argues these judicial systems are 'often faulty because they have been appointed by state legislature,' the same body that is likely working on the redistricting.
In terms of racial gerrymandering, the Supreme Court has said that this can be challenged.
Dow points to the 2023 Supreme Court decision that claimed Alabama's redistricting was not 'simply a partisan gerrymander' by Republicans but actually a 'racial gerrymander,' and those district lines were subject to revision.
Though Black Alabamians accounted for around 30% of the state at the time, they could only elect one of their preferred candidates in the state's seven districts, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. When the Republican-controlled legislature failed to create a second district in which the Black population had a fair shot, a federal court created one, which eventually led to the state's election of Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures.
Although acknowledging the difference, Volić says the line between 'partisan' and 'racial' gerrymandering tends to be 'thin,' and in order for courts to tell states that they need to redistrict fairly, 'you have to argue that the line has been crossed.'
In 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of South Carolina Republicans, arguing that what a lower court said was a racial gerrymander that diluted the African American vote was, in fact, a partisan gerrymander.
Just this past week, the Florida Supreme Court, which is dominated by appointees hand-picked by the state's Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, upheld a congressional district map that eliminated a majority-Black district in north Florida, which DeSantis had chopped up following the 2020 census, dispersing the Black population into four different majority white districts.
Volić says the last 20 years have been 'terrible for gerrymandering,' though he points to some progress, such as efforts to place redistricting in the hands of independent commissions and the role of mathematicians in recent years to create congressional maps that 'rationally' create districts 'detached from politics and partisanship.'
The issue is convincing legislatures to give up their power, and to do so in a timely manner, even if the courts have ruled that a district has been unfairly gerrymandered.
The judicial system is 'tectonically slow moving,' Volić says, and while parties argue it at the court level, the U.S. continues to "conduct elections in these terrible maps."
'Even if the final outcome is favorable to minorities or whoever is being disenfranchised, the damage has already been done in many ways,' Volić argues. 'This is a system that's very conducive to taking power away in a nefarious way.'
Contact us at letters@time.com.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Threshold for tax reporting from slot wins raised by Trump tax bill
Threshold for tax reporting from slot wins raised by Trump tax bill

USA Today

time7 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Threshold for tax reporting from slot wins raised by Trump tax bill

For gamblers, the impact of President Donald Trump's signature tax package is much like a night at the tables: you win some, you lose some. Tucked away in the nearly 900-page mega tax-and-spending bill is a provision that raises the minimum win slot-machine win that requires hand-payments and tax reporting at casinos. Signed into law on July 4, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act lifts the maximum win before casinos must issue a WG-2 form and shut down the machine to $2,000, up from the long-time figure of $1,200 and ties the threshold to inflation. The section takes effect in 2026 with the inflation index starting in 2027. American Gaming Association Senior Vice President of Government Relations Chris Cylke praised the provision to the gambling industry trade publication SBC Americas. "Raising the slot tax reporting threshold to $2,000 and indexing it to inflation is a long-overdue modernization that reduces regulatory burdens and improves the customer experience," Cylke said. The association noted in a 2022 press release that the $1,200 threshold was created in 1977. A Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator indicates that the threshold would be over $6,600 in June of 2025 if it had been tied to inflation. Nevada Rep. Dina Titus (D) told Las Vegas CBS affiliate KLAS that the provision does not go far enough. 'While raising the slot reporting threshold to $2,000 is a step in the right direction, it is still inadequate," Titus, a champion of the SLOT Act that would raise the threshold to $5,000, explained. "The IRS Advisory Council recommended this threshold be raised over $5,000 and indexed to inflation." Gamblers lose tax break in the 'Big Beautiful Bill' On the losing side, gamblers will be taking a hit courtesy of a separate tax provision in the newly created law. Starting in 2026, gamblers winning $1,000 can only deduct 90% of their losses, down from a previous 100% deduction. The amount of losses players can deduct is limited to their winnings, and deductible losses cannot exceed total winnings for the year. Titus introduced the My FAIR BET Act on July 7 to restore the 100% deduction for gamblers. "We should be encouraging players to properly report their winnings and wager using legal operators," Titus previously told USA TODAY in a statement. "The Senate change will only push people to not report their winnings and to use unregulated platforms."

Before and after photos show Trump's redesign of Rose Garden
Before and after photos show Trump's redesign of Rose Garden

CNN

time8 minutes ago

  • CNN

Before and after photos show Trump's redesign of Rose Garden

Before and after photos show Trump's redesign of Rose Garden Before and after photos show the dramatic changes the Trump administration is making to the White House Rose Garden, including paving over the lawn. The garden has undergone several renovations since its creation by First Lady Ellen Wilson in 1913. 00:59 - Source: CNN 'South Park' skewers Trump after signing new Paramount deal In their first episode of the season, the creators of "South Park" mocked President Donald Trump and Paramount after they just signed a new $1.5 billion contract. Paramount is looking to merge with Skydance Media and needs the Trump-influenced FCC to approve the deal. 01:24 - Source: CNN Erin Burnett on the significance of Trump knowing he's in the Epstein files CNN's Erin Burnett explains how reports that President Trump was briefed that he is named in the Epstein files shine a light on his recent denials of that exact claim. 02:13 - Source: CNN Judge declines to release Epstein grand jury documents A Florida federal judge declined to release additional grand jury documents from the criminal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, marking the first roadblock in the Justice Department's efforts to quell the public backlash over the handling of the case. CNN's Evan Perez reports. 02:43 - Source: CNN Kaitlan Collins asks Tulsi Gabbard if she's targeting Obama to improve her standing with Trump 00:51 - Source: CNN Trump announces US-Japan trade deal President Donald Trump announced a long-awaited trade agreement with Japan on Tuesday night, a framework between the allies and major trading partners that appeared elusive just weeks ago. CNN's Kristie Lu Stout breaks down what's in the deal. 00:46 - Source: CNN What's behind White House attacks on the Fed Chair? White House advisers are ramping up attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. CNN's Phil Mattingly explains why the Trump Administration could make Powell's life miserable, even as the President says he has no plan to fire him. 02:09 - Source: CNN Johnson shuts door on House vote before Sept. to release Epstein files Speaker Mike Johnson said he does not plan to allow votes on any measures related to the Jeffrey Epstein case before September, despite intense pressure from some of his own GOP members. 01:10 - Source: CNN Jon Stewart slams CBS for canceling 'Late Show' "The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart slammed CBS during his first broadcast since Stephen Colbert announced "The Late Show" would not return beyond May 2026. Some critics alleged the cancellation of Colbert's show is an effort to smooth the parent company's desired merger with Skydance Media. CBS cited financial reasons for discontinuing the show. 01:49 - Source: CNN Epstein accuser recounts Trump's late-night visit to Epstein's office Jeffrey Epstein accuser Maria Farmer talks to CNN's Erin Burnett about an interaction she had with President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein when she was 25. The White House denies that President Trump visited Jeffrey Epstein's office 03:44 - Source: CNN Will Commanders' billionaire owners give in to Trump? President Donald Trump has threatened to restrict a stadium deal with the NFL's Washington Commanders if they don't change the team name back to 'Redskins.' CNN Contributor and Prime Video host of "The Cari Champion Show" Cari Champion says she has 'a hard time believing' the owners will capitulate. 02:10 - Source: CNN An inside look at one of the most coveted offices in the US Capitol Sen. Chris Coons (D-Delaware) gives CNN's Dana Bash a tour of his office once occupied by the late Senator John McCain, as well as a "hideaway" that offers an impressive view and backdrop for bipartisan discussions both senators are known for. 02:17 - Source: CNN Harvard takes on Trump administration in court Harvard University was back in court for a hearing in its funding fight case against the Trump administration, who froze more than $2 billion in federal funding for research this Spring. Harvard lawyer Steven Lehotsky argued the government is in 'blatant and unrepentant violation' of the First Amendment, as well as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. CNN's Betsy Klein reports. 01:51 - Source: CNN Democrats walk out before vote for controversial Trump nominee Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans voted on Thursday to advance the nomination of Emil Bove, President Donald Trump's former personal attorney, to a federal judgeship, over the loud protests of Democrats. 01:42 - Source: CNN Trump's 'Manosphere' problems Influential podcasters with large audiences of millennial and Gen Z men helped propel President Donald Trump to victory in 2024. Now some of those same voices are sharing criticisms of the current administration. CNN's Steve Contorno breaks it down. 01:56 - Source: CNN Trump DOJ fires federal prosecutor in Epstein case Maurene Comey, a federal prosecutor in the case against accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, has been fired from her job in the Southern District of New York, according to people familiar with the situation. 01:56 - Source: CNN Bernie Sanders calls Trump's GOP 'cult of the individual' Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that Republicans developed an almost Stalinist-type devotion to President Donald Trump. 00:45 - Source: CNN This Native American senator brings Oklahoma ranch style to Washington Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma) gives CNN's Dana Bash a tour of his Capitol office, which showcases his Cherokee heritage and rancher lifestyle. 02:35 - Source: CNN Ex-Trump business associate on Trump's friendship with Epstein CNN's Erin Burnett speaks with former Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino COO Jack O'Donnell about one of President Trump's previous interactions with Jeffrey Epstein. 02:27 - Source: CNN Fearing ICE crackdown, this family self-deports Fearing increased immigration enforcement, undocumented immigrant Julio Mendoza and his American wife, Sasha, made the difficult decision to self-deport to Mexico with their three children, all of whom are US Citizens. CNN's Priscilla Alvarez reports. 01:35 - Source: CNN

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store