Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, left, and Texas Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, right, listen as Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu speaks to reporters during a press conference at the DuPage County Democratic Party headquarters on Aug. 3, 2025 in Carol Stream, Illinois. Wu was with a group of Democratic Texas lawmakers who left the state so a quorum could not be reached during a special session called to redistrict the state. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Fueled by President Donald Trump’s aims to bolster the U.S. House’s razor-thin GOP majority in the 2026 midterm elections, a rare mid-decade redistricting fight in Texas grew increasingly bitter in recent days and engulfed other states.

As Democratic legislators in the Lone Star State fled to block a new congressional map, a handful of both blue and red states eyed their own redistricting plans, lawsuits cropped up and members of Congress pledged bills to curb redistricting wars.

While Texas is the only state that has so far taken formal action to redraw its U.S. House lines, a full-blown arms race could be imminent.

Here’s a breakdown on the redistricting battle as the drama unfolds:

How did all of this interest in redistricting kick off?

Republicans in Texas drew a new congressional map at the urging of Trump that could give the GOP five crucial new congressional seats in 2026.

Midterm elections typically lead to the loss of congressional seats for a president’s party. 

Meanwhile, the GOP currently holds 219 seats in the House, while Democrats hold 212 spots, with four vacancies. That extremely narrow majority has created immense challenges for U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, as he tries to enact Trump’s sweeping agenda and cater to the president’s demands as well as factions in the GOP conference.

Though congressional districts are typically redrawn every decade following each U.S. Census, the move, particularly in Texas, is not unprecedented and is allowed.

What’s going on in Texas?

Texas Republicans unveiled a draft of the new congressional map in late July, which looks to reshape and flip major metro areas’ districts held by Democrats.

According to The Texas Tribune, the Department of Justice sent Texas’ leaders a letter in early July that said four of its districts violate the U.S. Constitution. The proposed map would dismantle those districts, per the Tribune.

More than 50 of Texas’ Democratic legislators left the state to try to block the legislature from adopting the new map, according to the Tribune.

This move has drawn the ire of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who went so far as to file a lawsuit asking to remove the Texas House Democratic Caucus chair, state Rep. Gene Wu, after Wu left the state.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton also said Tuesday that he will pursue a court ruling that declares the seats vacant for the House Democrats who do not return by Friday.

Texas GOP U.S. Sen. John Cornyn has also called on the FBI “to take any appropriate steps to aid in Texas state law enforcement efforts to locate or arrest potential lawbreakers who have fled the state.” Trump on Tuesday, asked by a reporter if the FBI should “get involved,” said, “Well, they may have to.”

How is California reacting?

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has been among the most vocal Democratic governors in suggesting retaliating against Texas Republicans by redrawing his populous blue state’s own lines before the 2026 elections.

State laws in California and other Democratic states make mid-decade redistricting tougher than it is in Texas.

While pro-democracy groups have praised California’s nonpartisan commission as the “gold standard” of independent redistricting, Newsom has indicated he would ask state lawmakers to temporarily scrap it to join the arms race he says Trump started in Texas.

At a Monday press conference, Newsom justified his exploration of mid-decade redistricting in the Golden State by describing Trump’s recent and historic record as anti-democratic.

“These folks don’t play by the rules,” Newsom said. “If they can’t win playing the game with the existing set of rules, they’ll change the rules. That’s what Donald Trump has done … Here is someone who tried to break this country, tried to light democracy on fire on Jan. 6. He recognizes he’s going to lose in the midterms.”

What other states are looking at potentially redistricting?

Vice President JD Vance is slated to visit Indiana Thursday in an attempt to push redistricting, according to the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

Indiana GOP Gov. Mike Braun said that as of now, no commitments have been made, when asked about redistricting efforts in the Hoosier State, per the Capital Chronicle.

Leaders of large Democratic states, in addition to California, are considering their own redistricting in response to Texas.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul wrote in an op-ed published in the Houston Chronicle Tuesday that she would “not sit on the sidelines” and watch “Republicans dismantle democracy.”

“What Texas is doing isn’t a clever strategy, it’s political arson — torching our democracy to cling to power,” Hochul wrote. “The only viable recourse is to fight fire with fire.”

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker appeared alongside Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin and a group of exiled Texas Democratic lawmakers at a news conference Tuesday. Pritzker said it was “possible” the state would pursue redistricting, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Other Democratic governors — even including Laura Kelly of ruby-red Kansas — raised the prospect during a Democratic Governors Association meeting in Wisconsin last week of pursuing mid-decade redistricting if Texas follows through.

Republican states are also considering jumping in the fray.

Missouri Senate President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin, a Republican, told a news radio station last week that it was “likely” lawmakers would convene in a special session to redraw district lines after pressure from Trump.

And Rep. Don Bacon, a Republican who holds the most competitive of Nebraska’s three U.S. House seats but plans to step down, told the Nebraska Examiner that Republicans in the state were having conversations about potential redistricting.

What downside do some see?

An arms race to shorten the cycle for redrawing congressional lines could come at a cost for efforts to overhaul the redistricting process.

Common Cause, a national pro-democracy group that advocates for election reforms including nonpartisan redistricting, urged Democrats not to respond to Texas.

A redistricting arms race would only result in “rigged elections across America,” Emily Eby French, the policy director for Common Cause Texas, said on a press call last week. It was wrong for Republicans to put “a thumb on the scale” through redistricting, she said, but also wrong for Democrats to do the same.

“The real solution is for Democrats to help us lift the Republican thumb off of the Texas scale and every other scale in America until we reach free and fair elections for everyone.”

Are party leaders egging this on?

Trump, whose urging appeared to prompt Texas Republicans to action, has consistently pushed lawmakers in that state to reinforce the GOP advantage there.

Tuesday, he said on CNBC that Republicans were “entitled” to five more House seats in Texas.

Martin, the DNC chair, responded in Illinois.

“No party is entitled to any district,” he said. “We have to go out and earn the votes.”

Still, Martin advised Democrats in blue states to do the opposite by responding in kind to Texas Republicans.

In an interview with States Newsroom last week, Martin suggested Democratic states drop any commitment to nonpartisan redistricting in response to Texas.

“We’re not here to tie one of our hands behind our back,” he said. “We can’t be the only party that’s playing by the rules.”

How is Congress reacting?

At least two GOP House lawmakers — representing blue states looking at retaliatory redistricting efforts against Trump — are taking it upon themselves to introduce bills in Congress that bar these initiatives.

GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley of California introduced a bill in the House this week that would ban mid-decade redistricting across the country.

Kiley said Newsom “is trying to subvert the will of voters and do lasting damage to democracy in California,” in a statement earlier this week.

“Fortunately, Congress has the ability to protect California voters using its authority under the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution,” he said. “This will also stop a damaging redistricting war from breaking out across the country.”

Rep. Mike Lawler, a New York Republican, also said he plans to introduce legislation to prohibit “partisan gerrymandering and mid-decade redistricting.”

The New York Republican told CNN on Tuesday that “this is fundamentally why Congress is broken,” adding that “you do not have competitive districts and so, most members are focused on primaries and not actually engaging in a general election.” 

U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks to reporters at the Capitol as lawmakers work on the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" on June 25, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans appeared deeply divided Wednesday over how to establish a fund for rural hospitals to offset the budget impacts of Medicaid cuts in the “big, beautiful bill.”

The hospitals, which are generally already hurting financially, rely heavily on Medicaid, a state-federal partnership that provides health insurance for low-income households and for some people with disabilities.

GOP senators haven’t yet reached agreement on how to structure the fund, or on dozens of other unresolved provisions in the sweeping package, even though leaders hope to begin voting as soon as Friday. Still up in the air were agreements on major provisions of the measure involving the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s food aid program for low-income people and a proposed selloff of certain public lands.

Republican leaders continued to project optimism. “We’re well on our way to getting this bill passed this week,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during a floor speech, continuing to press ahead toward a self-imposed Fourth of July deadline. 

Others saw it differently. Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson cast doubt on the short timeframe leaders have set to reach final agreement and move the bill through both chambers.

“We’re still discussing some pretty fundamental issues,” Johnson said. “I’m just laying out the reality of the situation. We’ve got a lot of work to do.”

‘The only person up here that’s ever ran a rural hospital’

Dueling plans to establish the rural hospital fund to ease the threat of Medicaid cuts circulated among senators working to finalize the massive tax and spending cut measure, but an agreement had not surfaced by late afternoon.

Unofficial details showed Senate Republicans eyeing the inclusion of a $15 billion fund — $3 billion a year between fiscal 2027 and fiscal 2031 — to help rural hospitals, according to multiple reports.

But Sen. Roger Marshall, who sits on the Senate Committee on Finance, said he wants to increase that fund to $5 billion annually, with “half of that going to rural hospitals, and half of it going to primary care and prescription drugs and throw in physical therapy and occupational therapy, all the others as well.”

The Kansas Republican and physician said “we should probably only do it for four or five years and then regroup and see where we are.”

“I’m the only person up here that’s ever ran a rural hospital — I actually know something about them,” he added.

While Marshall said he loves “90%” of the broader bill, he said not nearly enough is being cut.

“But I can’t get the votes to do that, so it’d still be the largest cut in spending in my lifetime anyway,” he said, noting that “it’s going to be hard for the House to vote against it.”

Fund size criticized

On a midday call with reporters, Traci Gleason with the Missouri Budget Project said the stabilization fund being batted around by lawmakers “would fall well short of addressing these problems.”

“Forty-three percent of Missouri’s rural hospitals are at risk of closing, and 17% are considered to be at immediate risk,” said Gleason, who spoke during a virtual press briefing organized by the left-leaning Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

“Those figures don’t account for all of the other health care providers in rural communities, like federally qualified health centers and others that operate on these incredibly thin margins. So the massive cuts to Medicaid are what is creating the problem and the only real way to address it is for Congress to not make these massive cuts,” she said.

‘Problematic’ Medicaid cuts

Sen. Susan Collins was advocating for a much bigger rural hospital stabilization fund, at $100 billion.

“I don’t think that solves the entire problem,” the Maine Republican and chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee said.

“The Senate cuts in Medicaid are far deeper than the House cuts, and I think that’s problematic as well.”

Sen. Jim Justice of West Virginia said that the $15 billion “is better than zero.”

“You know, naturally, I’d want it to be as high as it possibly can,” he said, adding that rural hospitals are the “lifeblood” of his state.

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, a loud voice against Medicaid benefit cuts, said a stabilization fund is a “good idea but we’re still going to have to address the longer term effects of this.”

When asked for a dollar figure, Hawley said “it depends on the structure of it.”

Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said he keeps hearing the Senate will take a procedural vote on Friday, though that isn’t set in stone. 

“Should be a fun weekend for all of us,” Cornyn said. “Can’t wait.”

Once the Senate votes on what is called a motion to proceed, there’s a maximum of 20 hours of floor debate before the chamber must begin its marathon amendment voting session and eventually a passage vote.

SNAP provisions

Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman, an Arkansas Republican, said a revised version of his committee’s bill had not yet been reviewed by the parliamentarian.

The updated text alters a section restructuring the cost-share of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, a key food assistance program for low-income people.

The provision would require states for the first time to shoulder some of the cost of the program’s benefits. The amount a state owes would be determined by its error payment rate, with greater error rates requiring a higher state share.

Complex rules govern what can and can’t be included in the measure. The Senate parliamentarian ruled the language in the initial proposal did not comply with the chamber’s reconciliation rules.

The updated proposal would allow states more flexibility during the policy’s phase-in in fiscal 2028, allowing them to choose either the error rate in fiscal 2025 or fiscal 2026.

Boozman told reporters that change sought to respond to the parliamentarian’s ruling.

The parliamentarian “asked us to allow them (states) to use a different time frame — essentially gave them more time to understand what their error rate would be and to plan for it,” Boozman said. “And so we adjusted for that and I think we satisfied it.”

Lee and public lands

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Mike Lee of Utah reportedly narrowed a provision that would mandate the sale of Bureau of Land Management lands. He has not publicly said where it stands with the parliamentarian.

A committee spokesman did not return messages seeking clarification Tuesday and Wednesday, but a version of the changes obtained by news media shows changes consistent with what Lee proposed Monday.

Those changes include limiting the mandated sales to only the BLM — and not U.S. Forest Service lands, as Lee had initially proposed — and lowering the percentage of the agency’s lands that must be sold to between .25% and .5%. The initial proposal required between .5% and .75%.

The updated provision would also only require lands located within 5 miles of a population center to be sold and exempts lands that are currently used for grazing or another “valid existing right that is incompatible with the development of housing,” according to a copy of the changes obtained by hunting and angling publication Outdoor Life.

The provision has sparked opposition from Western lawmakers, including a handful of conservatives.

But it also has its share of supporters. Alaska Republican Dan Sullivan told reporters he had not seen the updated text but remained supportive of the idea.

“I’ve been supportive of what Sen. Lee is trying to do,” he said. “We have a lot of public lands in Alaska that the federal government abuses. But we’re in a good discussion on that, so I need to see the update.”