Redistricting desperation is going viral ahead of 2026
Why it matters: Republicans started it. But both parties are behaving as if winning the House majority next year is an existential fight.
What's at stake: If Dems take the House, they can end President Trump's partisan budget cuts, gain control of the House's oversight powers and ... very likely ... impeach the president.
Neither House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) nor House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is in control of redistricting, which is a state-by-state issue.
But Jeffries said Thursday that Democrats can't "unilaterally disarm," and Johnson has spoken positively about the push in Texas.
In just the last 23 days:
July 15: Trump pushed Texas Republicans for a mid-decade redistricting explicitly to add five GOP seats. Just three weeks ago, this was considered an extraordinary gambit.
July 16: Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened to retaliate by adding five Democratic seats, despite California's state Constitution forbidding mid-decade redraws. He'll likely try to change the Constitution in November by calling a special election.
Sunday: Texas Democrats fled the state to deny quorum for a special session that would include a vote on redistricting.
Monday: Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul teased a constitutional amendment to bypass the redistricting commission in New York after the midterms.
Tuesday: Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) asked the FBI to help track down the Texas Democrats.
Thursday: Trump called for a new census that wouldn't count undocumented immigrants. This seems extremely unlikely. The Supreme Court blocked Trump from not counting undocumented people in the 2020 census.
Thursday: Cornyn said the FBI has agreed to help track down the Texas Democrats.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
Pundit James Carville apologizes and pulls video suggesting a Melania Trump ‘Epstein connection'
Democratic strategist James Carville publicly apologized Thursday for posting a video suggesting some sort of 'Epstein connection' involving first lady Melania Trump. The 80-year-old pundit issued the mea culpa at the start of his latest 'Politics War Room' podcast episode, noting that he also took down and edited the offending video after hearing from the first lady's attorney. 3 Melania Trump has aggressively defended herself from allegations she was introduced to her husband by Jeffrey Epstein. AP 'In last week's podcast episode, we spoke with Judd Legum. After the episode, we received a letter from Melania Trump's lawyer. He took issue with our title of one of those YouTube videos from that episode and a couple of comments I made about the first lady,' Carville explained. 'We took a look at what they complained about, and we took down the video and edited out those comments from the episode,' he continued. 'I also take back these statements and apologize,' Carville, sounding like he was reading a prepared statement, added. Melania shared a transcript of Carville's apology on X – along with a screenshot of the pulled video with a red 'X' across it. The YouTube clip was titled: 'James Carville: The Epstein Connection – Trump & Melania.' It's unclear what specific claims made by the former Bill Clinton campaign manager peeved the first lady's legal team since the offending comments have been scrubbed. 3 Carville noted that the edits and apology were made after he heard from Melania's lawyer. Getty Images Carville's retraction and apology follows lefty news website Daily Beast taking down a Melania story last week after the outlet was contacted by her lawyers. 'After this story was published, The Beast received a letter from First Lady Melania Trump's attorney challenging the headline and framing of the article,' read the editor's note that replaced the article's text. 'After reviewing the matter, the Beast has taken down the article and apologizes for any confusion or misunderstanding,' the note continued. 3 Melania shared Carville's apology on X. X / @MELANIATRUMP The retracted article highlighted dubious claims by author Michael Wolff that a modeling agent connected to notorious sex predator Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania to her husband, President Trump. In her self-titled 2024 memoir, Melania explained that she met Trump at a September 1998 Fashion Week party at the Kit Kat Klub in New York City. Trump sat down next to his future wife and started a conversation, Melania recalled. 'I found myself drawn to his magnetic energy,' she wrote. The Trumps got engaged six years later and married in 2005.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Harvard and Trump admin await judge's decision as deadline ticks closer
As Harvard University is in talks with the Trump administration over a potential deal or settlement, the university is waiting with bated breath to hear the decision of a federal judge over canceled government funding for the university. The institution requested that Judge Allison D. Burroughs make a decision before September 3, when much of the damage from the Trump administration's billions in research grant and other funding cuts would be irreversible. Burroughs has yet to make a decision since a court date on July 21 during oral arguments, when she said she will get an opinion out as soon as possible. However, during the court date, she expressed her uncertainty with the Trump administration's actions, calling the lawyer's arguments 'a little bit mind-boggling.' During the hearing, Burroughs pushed back on whether the federal government could cancel grants across the institution en masse without substantially proving that researchers or labs had engaged in antisemitism. She added that the 'consequences of that in terms of the constitutional law are staggering to me.' President Donald Trump, for his part, took to Truth Social to take aim at Burroughs the same day, calling her a 'TOTAL DISASTER' and an 'automatic 'loss' for the People of our Country.' He also signaled that the federal government would appeal her decision if she sides with Harvard. Legal experts believe the case could wind up going as far as the Supreme Court. Read more: Is Harvard considering a $500M deal with Trump? Faculty don't think so Harvard's second lawsuit over the federal government's attacks against international students is more settled. Read more: Trump admin appeals federal judge's decision rejecting ban of foreign Harvard students Burroughs granted two preliminary injunctions related to the case in late June. One preliminary injunction rejects a Trump administration attempt to ban Harvard foreign students from entering the country to study. This decision was appealed by the Trump administration and will now go to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. The other preliminary injunction allows Harvard to host international students. No appeal has been filed on that decision. What has happened between the Trump admin and Harvard? The Trump administration has gone after Harvard since April, cutting billions of dollars. Demanding an overhaul of Harvard's leadership structure, admissions and hiring — the federal government warned the school could risk losing $9 billion in funding. Harvard rejected those demands, stating they seek to 'invade university freedoms long recognized by the Supreme Court.' Then the fight over funding occurred. It began with a $2.2 billion funding freeze on April 14 after the school refused to comply with the federal administration's demands. In response, Harvard filed a lawsuit on April 21, arguing that its constitutional rights had been violated by the government's threats to pull billions of dollars in funding. Harvard President Garber also signed onto a letter with hundreds of other university presidents pushing back against 'government overreach and political interference' by the Trump administration. At the beginning of May, the Trump administration said it would bar Harvard University from acquiring new federal grants while the school continues to refuse to comply with the administration's demands for change on its campus. A few days later, eight federal agencies cut $450 million in grants and then the United States Department of Health and Human Services cut $60 million in grants from the university. Harvard went on to amend its lawsuit against the Trump administration. Read more: Trump used her story to attack Harvard. She says 'don't destroy the university in my name' On May 16, a wave of nearly one thousand federal research grant terminations began, amounting to more than $2.4 billion, according to an analysis by Nature. In response, Harvard established a new Presidential Priorities Fund, asking for donations in the midst of federal cuts. Some of Harvard's schools, including its School of Public Health, took to social media to ask for donations after nearly every single federal grant had been terminated. Other investigations and threats have been made against the institution, some of which have focused on threatening the university's ability to enroll international students. This prompted Harvard to open a second lawsuit against the Trump administration over its ability to accept international students. Most recently, the State Department opened an investigation into Harvard University's use of international visas. The Department of Homeland Security has also subpoenaed Harvard over its failure to provide documents concerning the misconduct or criminal actions of foreign students. More Higher Ed 'They fear deportation': University student newspaper sues Trump admin over free speech Is Harvard considering a $500M deal with Trump? Faculty don't think so Here's who is pushing Trump to upend higher ed — and what they want Trump admin brings Harvard antisemitism case to Justice Dept. after 'fruitless' discussions Trump used her story to attack Harvard. She says 'don't destroy the university in my name' Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘RiggedDistricting': Lawmakers from Texas, nationwide, warn of GOP attack on voting rights
Texas state Sen. Royce West has served in the Lone Star State's Legislature since 1992. In his three decades of public service, he's been through a couple of rounds of congressional redistricting. That inherently political process can often be bruising, and the debate is often impassioned. But he said he's never seen an effort to reshape his home state's congressional map like he's seeing now. For one, it's happening well before the once-a-decade release of U.S. Census data that's critical to fairly apportioning representation for all Texans on Capitol Hill, he said. For another, the effort, led by Republicans who hold a supermajority across state government, is coming at the behest of President Donald Trump and just months before the 2026 midterm elections that will determine control of the U.S. House of Representatives, he continued. And he and his Lone State colleagues have just one word to describe it: 'RiggedDistricting.' And since he was in Boston this week to call attention to a partisan fight that's made headlines nationwide — and to attend a conclave of state legislators that drew thousands of his colleagues to the city's Seaport district — West decided to put his argument in terms that the locals could appreciate. 'You know, there's some guy by the name of Paul Revere, and I remember in history, he was traveling around saying, 'The British are coming,' West said during a news conference on the steps of the State House on Wednesday. 'Well, we're traveling now, saying 'RiggedDistricting' is coming,'' he continued. In public appearances across Boston this week, the Texas Democrats warned that the GOP-led effort to effectively erase five currently majority-minority seats is a prelude to a nationwide fight over voting rights and representation for Black and brown Americans nationwide. West and other Texas lawmakers were joined at Wednesday's news conference by Democratic legislators from three dozen states, several of whom sounded a similar warning. Missouri state Rep. Ashley Aune said her state is next on the GOP's redistricting wish list, with Republicans in the Show Me State looking to take a 6-2 majority on Capitol Hill and expand it to 7-1. 'I serve with a super-majority of Republicans in Missouri. And for the last several years under [former President Joe] Biden, we heard [from Republicans] 'We can't listen to the federal government. We can't trust anything coming from the federal government,' she said. 'We're 'The Show-Me State'. All right, well, I guess Donald Trump showed us some maps, and we're just gonna jump. What I keep reminding my Republican colleagues across the aisle is that Donald Trump is a president. He is not a dictator; he is not a king. But he is an authoritarian,' Aune said. Trump injected himself into the fiery debate on Tuesday, announcing that he believes Lone Star State Republicans are 'entitled to five more seats' on Capitol Hill. If the effort in Texas is successful, Democrats would face a steeper climb as they seek to retake control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2026 midterm elections. Republicans currently hold a 219-212 edge in the lower chamber, with four vacancies. Right now, Democrats only would have to flip a handful of seats to retake control. The Texas contingent met with Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey and Secretary of State William L. Galvin, both Democrats, on Tuesday. There, they sounded a similar warning. Galvin, the state's chief election officer, wryly noted that gerrymandering takes its name from former Vice President Elbridge Gerry, a Marblehead native. Wednesday's news conference fell on the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, which resulted in more than 1 million Black Americans registering to vote in the four years after it was passed, according to the Brennan Center. Massachusetts State Rep. Carlos Gonzalez, D-10th Hampden, implored the crowd to 'listen to what we can do to continue to support our state legislators in Texas.' Like other lawmakers, Gonzalez positioned the fight in Texas as a broader, nationwide battle. 'It is a united cause that we must continue to fight,' he said. 'It is right. Not only right for Texas, but right for California; not only right for Texas, but right for Massachusetts; not only right for blue states, but right for red states and the United States of America.' More on Politics This is the most popular person in Trump's administration, Gallup poll says Report: Texas Democrats staying in Illinois evacuated after bomb threat Harvard and Trump admin await judge's decision as deadline ticks closer This is the one American both Democrats and Republicans agree they love Springfield city councilor files lawsuit against former colleagues, alleging 'calculated attack' Read the original article on MassLive.
