Texas lawmakers are advancing a redistricting plan that would create five new Republican-leaning congressional seats. The move has become a flashpoint in a larger national struggle over control of the U.S. House of Representatives heading into the second half of President Trump’s term. Democrats are sharply opposed, calling the effort both an “assault on democracy” and “racist.”
This fact check examines those claims.
Democrats frame the Texas plan as undermining democratic governance. However, both major parties have long drawn maps that favor their side. For example:
The claim that Texas’ approach is an unprecedented “assault on democracy” is disputed by historical precedent. Both parties have engaged in partisan map drawing, and similar imbalances exist in Democratic-controlled states.
Challenges to redistricting on racial grounds are common. In Petteway v. Galveston County, Democrats opposed new maps because they resulted in a black Republican official rather than a black Democrat.
The proposed Texas plan, while not drawn explicitly by race, increases minority-majority representation in multiple districts:
Rep. Todd Hunter, author of the plan, testified that the districts were drawn “primarily using political performance criteria” recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court. He said the changes reflect population growth, voting trends across ethnic lines, and increased Republican support among Hispanic voters.
While opponents argue the maps are discriminatory, the proposed districts would increase both Hispanic and black majority districts compared to prior maps. The claim that the plan is “racist” is contested by the map’s demographic outcomes.
Democrats have characterized Texas’ redistricting as an attack on democracy and as racially discriminatory. The record shows, however, that partisan gerrymandering has been practiced by both parties and that the new Texas map increases minority-majority districts. Legal challenges are expected, but whether the plan violates constitutional or statutory protections will ultimately be decided in court.
