Tarrant County Commissioners adopt controversial redistricting map
The Brief
Tarrant County Commissioners on Tuesday voted on new precinct boundaries that will make it easier for Republicans to be elected in certain areas.
Judge Tim O'Hare said the effort was to fulfill a campaign promise and increase the Republican majority on the court.
Opponents say it's racially discriminatory and meant to suppress minority voices.
FORT WORTH, Texas - The Republican-led Tarrant County Commissioners Court approved a redistricting map that seeks to expand Republican seats on the court.
What's New
More than 250 people signed up to speak at Tuesday's Commissioners Court meeting, both for and against the effort to redistrict Tarrant County.
Commissioners ultimately voted 3-2 to approve Map 7.
Map 7 was considered to be the most conservative option. One thing that stands out about it is that it moves the Arlington sports stadiums and hotels into the Republican-controlled Precinct 3.
Within minutes of the vote being announced, State Rep. Tony Tinderholt, a Republican from Arlington, announced he is running for Simmons' Precinct 2 seat.
"I'm ready to come home. As a proud Christian, 21-year combat veteran, and dedicated public servant in the Texas House of Representatives, I'm honored to announce my candidacy for Tarrant County Commissioner Precinct 2," he said in a news release.
That election is not until November 2026.
Democratic Commissioner Alisa Simmons of Precinct 2 will see the most significant changes to her precinct's boundary, including moving AT&T Stadium, Globe Life Field, and Texas Live to Precinct 3.
She questioned why the consultants hired to redraw the maps were not made available for questioning and pointed out that Map 7 was not even an option presented during the four public meetings held in various communities.
What they're saying
Commissioner Simmons told FOX 4's Amelia Jones that she plans to run for re-election despite the changes to her precinct and a newly declared republican opponent, state representative Tony Tinderholt.
"This is racist, racial gerrymandering, it's intentional discrimination," said Simmons. "I am going to seek reelection with a tough map, and I'll be blockwalking from Arlington to White Settlement. Which doesn't make any sense, but I will seek reelection."
County Judge Tim O'Hare told us he believes if Democrats had the majority, they would have made a similar move.
"So for us, not to do that, when we are the controlling party, the majority party, would be foolish on our part, because we know if we lost, they would do the exact same thing," said O'Hare.
He believes Tarrant County will see four republicans on the five-member commissioners court one day.
"I think we're trending in the right direction, no pun intended, and so Tarrant County is alive and well in terms of being a red county and we intend to keep it that way," said O'Hare.
Big picture view
Typically, redistricting is done every 10 years after the census.
The Tarrant County Commissioners Court voted not to change it after the 2020 census.
Some people who spoke today believe the vote on redistricting violates the federal voter rights act. When Judge O'Hare was asked about the act, he cited a Supreme Court ruling that allows district boundaries to be redrawn for partisan purposes.
He said the motion passed today was 100 percent legal.
The backstory
Judge Tim O'Hare said the redistricting effort fulfills a campaign promise. His mission was to increase the court's Republican majority.
Currently, the court has two Republican commissioners in addition to O'Hare and two Democratic commissioners.
The proposed precinct maps increases the chances that at least one of the two Democratic-leaning precincts will flip during the next election.
Redistricting usually occurs after the U.S. Census data is released to ensure precinct lines are balanced according to population. But the commissioners in 2021 voted not to make any changes to the maps.
Opponents have called this late redistricting effort racially discriminatory and argued it dilutes the voices of minority communities.
The Source
The information in this story comes from Tuesday's Tarrant County Commissioner's Court meeting, past news coverage, and a news release from State Rep. Tony Tinderholt.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
26 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What to know as Trump administration targets tuition breaks for students without legal status
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — For two decades on Texas college campuses, it was a resilient law in the face of Republicans' hardening immigration agenda: in-state tuition prices for students who did not have legal resident status. But in a flash, the Texas policy that was the first of its kind in the U.S. was halted Wednesday, blocked by a federal judge hours after the Justice Department sued to dismantle it. Republican Texas leaders did not fight the challenge, but instead eagerly joined it. The surprise and quick end to the law, known as the 'Texas Dream Act,' stunned immigration advocates and Democrats, who called it a cruel punishment for hardworking students that will ultimately hurt the state's economy. Republicans cheered the outcome and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested that states with similar tuition policies could face similar actions. The lighting ruling ended a Texas policy that had once enjoyed bipartisan support when it was created in 2001, helped tens of thousands of students get into college and spawned similar laws in two dozen states. Here's what to know: The Texas law and the impact The Texas tuition policy was initially passed with sweeping bipartisan majorities in the state Legislature and signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, as a way to open access to higher education for students without legal residency already living in the state. Supporters then and now say it boosted the state's economy by creating a better-educated and better-prepared workforce. The law allowed students without legal resident status to qualify for in-state tuition if they had lived in Texas for three years before graduating from high school, and for a year before enrolling in college. They also had to sign an affidavit promising to apply for legal resident status as soon as possible. Texas now has about 57,000 qualifying students enrolled in its public universities and colleges, according to the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration , a nonpartisan nonprofit group of university leaders focused on immigration policy. The state has about 690,000 students overall at its public universities. The difference in tuition rates is substantial. For example, at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley , a 34,000-student campus along the border with Mexico, a state resident will pay about $10,000 in basic tuition for a minimum full-time class schedule in the upcoming school year. A non-resident student will pay $19,000. 'UTRGV understands that the consent judgment may affect financial plans already made by individual students,' the school said in a statement Thursday. 'Our priority and focus are on minimizing disruption to student success consistent with applicable law and helping students navigate this transition with clarity and care.' Political pushback and a swift end The law stood mostly unchallenged for years, but it came under fire as debates over illegal immigration intensified. In the 2012 Republican presidential primary, Perry ended up apologizing after saying critics of the law 'did not have a heart.' The law withstood several repeal efforts in the Republican-dominated Legislature. In the legislative session that ended on June 2, a repeal bill did not even get a vote. But the ax fell quickly. On Wednesday, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit calling the law unconstitutional. State Attorney General Ken Paxton, a key Trump ally, chose not to defend the law in court and instead filed a motion agreeing that it should not be enforced. With the state administration aligned with the Trump administration, the law was suddenly struck down by a federal judge without even an argument on the lawsuit's merits or a response from the students affected. Trump, immigration and higher ed The Trump administration challenged the law in a border state where Gov. Greg Abbott, Paxton and the Republican leadership have given full-throated support to his immigrant crackdown efforts and have spent billions trying to help. The ruling also expanded efforts by Trump to influence higher education across the country. The administration has leveraged federal funding and its student visa authority to clamp down on campus activism and stamp out diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives . Impact beyond Texas The ruling affected only the Texas law, but with nearly half of U.S. states having similar policies, Bondi suggested the administration could pursue similar action elsewhere. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis recently signed a bill to repeal the law in that state in July. 'Other states should take note that we will continue filing affirmative litigation to remedy unconstitutional state laws that discriminate against American citizens,' Bondi said. Immigration lawyers and education advocates said they are assessing if there are legal avenues to challenge the Texas ruling. 'Make no mistake, advocates, students, campuses are not going to just take this,' said Miriam Feldblum, president and chief executive officer of the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration. 'But I have no doubt there will be an effort to do this (elsewhere).' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
27 minutes ago
Trump admin live updates: Trump declines to give deadline for decision on Russia sanctions
"It's in my brain, the deadline," Trump said. President Donald Trump on Thursday hosted German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House, where the two discussed trade and support for Ukraine. The president met on Wednesday with a group of Senate Republicans amid his push for lawmakers to pass his "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," a sweeping immigration and tax bill that's faced pushback from some GOP members. 13 Updates 11:57 AM EDT Trump says travel ban countries 'didn't have things under control' President Donald Trump was asked about his latest travel ban on specific countries around the world and why Egypt was not included. The suspect in the Boulder, Colorado, attack was an Egyptian national and Trump cited the attack as a reason for his move. "Egypt has been a country that we deal with. They have things under control. The countries we have, don't have things under control," Trump said of the nations affected by the ban. 11:46 AM EDT German Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrives at White House German Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrived at the White House and greeted President Donald Trump with a handshake before their meeting. Johnson says he'll speak to Musk Thursday morning House Speaker Mike Johnson said he plans to speak directly with Elon Musk Thursday morning following the continued criticism of the 'big, beautiful bill' during a Bloomberg TV interview. 'Look, Elon is a good friend. We texted late last night. We're going to talk this morning. I just want to make sure that he understands what I think everybody on Capitol Hill understands," he said." Johnson said Musk "seems pretty dug in right now, and I can't quite understand the motivation behind it." "But I would tell you that what we're delivering in this bill is not only historic tax cuts, but historic savings as well. He seems to miss that,' Johnson added. Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump talked by phone Thursday amid a trade war between the two countries, according to Chinese state media.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How this Democrat fights Marjorie Taylor Greene's transphobia in Congress with smart preparation
New Mexico Democratic U.S. Rep. Melanie Stansbury wasn't planning to go viral. But when she spoke up during a congressional hearing last month and calmly held aloft an uncropped photo that debunked a Republican smear — while Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia Republican and subcommittee chairwoman, slammed her gavel in exasperation — the moment captured something larger than one procedural dispute. Keep up with the latest in + news and politics. In a single act of preparation and truth-telling, Stansbury had exposed the hearing as political theater. The doctored image, which Greene's team presented in an effort to humiliate USA Fencing Chair Damien Lehfeldt, appeared to show him flipping off the committee. But as Stansbury revealed, he was actually flashing a peace sign. 'The document you have up behind you is a misrepresentation of the actual post,' she said as Greene tried to continue speaking. Greene responded with a furious, uncontrolled banging of the gavel — a scene that quickly became the viral centerpiece of the May 8 Department of Government Efficiency Subcommittee hearing and a late-night comedy segment on Jimmy Kimmel Live! But Stansbury wasn't trying to be funny. She was trying to expose a lie. In a Tuesday interview with The Advocate, Stansbury explained that the viral moment was the result of weeks of planning — and a decision to reject silence. 'When we saw that the chairwoman was going to call a hearing on transgender athletes, actually my initial response was, we're not participating in that at all,' she said. 'Because clearly, it really is wholly outside of the scope of anything that the Oversight Committee has anything to do with. And it's just a blatant political attack on the trans community.' Related: Jasmine Crockett shreds GOP's obsession with trans people over American problems with 'Trump or trans' game Ultimately, she and her fellow Democrats chose to engage strategically. 'We were prepared to shut them down,' she said. 'We were ready to use every procedural motion we could. We were ready for any shenanigans they would pull.' The plan worked. Early in the hearing, Stansbury called a motion to adjourn, and when Republicans didn't have enough members in the room to stop her, the delay bought critical time. 'They had to sit there for about 10 or 15 minutes,' she recalled. 'And so during that time, some of our staff saw the poster they were planning on presenting.' That gave Stansbury the upper hand. When Greene unveiled the image, Stansbury called it out immediately. The gavel slammed. Greene shouted. The internet noticed. For Stansbury, who has been representing New Mexico's First District since 2021, the hearing was just the latest installment in what she calls a disturbing trend. 'In my personal opinion, I think that the Republican fixation on trans lives is weird,' she said. 'It's just weird. I almost cannot explain it.' Related: Nancy Mace sits silently as Robert Garcia roasts her anti-trans record in House Oversight hearing She singled out GOP members like South Carolina U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, saying, 'Who once purported to stand with [the] LGBTQ+ community and now are just so obsessed in a way that is unhealthy — even personally.' Stansbury made the same point even more bluntly during the hearing itself: 'It's just weird. Your obsession with this is weird.' Greene's retort — 'We'll let the American people decide who the weirdos are' — backfired spectacularly, becoming meme fodder within hours. 'I could tell that it got under the skin of the chairwoman when I said that,' Stansbury told The Advocate. Stansbury made clear that the GOP's culture war is not organic. 'This was a completely manufactured issue,' she said. 'You know, the Republicans are obsessed with less than 1 percent of the population.' And she knows exactly where it's coming from. 'If you rewind the tape and look at where it originated from, the same groups that have Heritage Foundation affiliation are the same as those who brought before the Supreme Court for the Dobbs case," she said, referring to the case that led the court to strike down Roe v. Wade, which protected abortion rights nationally. "They are all being funded by dark money behind the scenes. And it is a Christian nationalist agenda that is very explicitly going after the trans community.' That targeting, she warned, has real consequences. 'I have trans kids in my life, and people are scared. People are afraid just to be themselves. I have a veteran in my district who has shared her story, and she's afraid to leave her house.' Despite Republicans' fixation, Stansbury said the issue around taking away trans rights is nowhere near the top of mind for her constituents. 'It doesn't come up. It has never once come up. Ever. Once. Never,' she said. 'I don't get asked about it in town halls. I don't get asked about it when I'm on the campaign trail. I don't get asked about it at the doors.' Instead, she said, New Mexicans take pride in their state's record, which includes gender-affirming care protections, legal safeguards for providers, and some of the most progressive LGBTQ+ rights laws in the country. As the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico outlines, those seeking gender-affirming care in the state are protected by confidentiality laws and can assert their rights through legal channels if they face discrimination. The law explicitly shields the privacy of patients from out of state, and conversion therapy remains banned. 'One of the biggest applause lines that I get when I do town halls is when I list all of the things that New Mexico did under progressive leadership, including protecting LGBTQ civil rights and transgender care,' she said. But on taking rights away from trans people in the state? 'It is not a motivating issue for any constituent that I have ever talked to,' Stansbury said. Amid whispers from some Democrats that the party should tone down its public support for transgender rights to avoid alienating moderate voters, Stansbury offered a sharp rebuttal. 'What I make of the kind of political retreat that I see some people making around this issue is, like, the American people right now — no matter what their ideological affiliation is — they want to see strong leadership,' she said. 'Trump is trying to take us back a half-century, whether that's civil rights, LGBTQ rights, women's rights, whatever it is,' she continued. 'And so we have to be as bold and as fierce in our fight as Democrats in standing up and saying no — and punching back — as they are in attacking people.' Asked how Democrats should respond to the tidal wave of false narratives, Stansbury was unequivocal: 'Allyship doesn't mean anything if it doesn't come with action.' 'To me, that means saying something when you see something, fighting back in a full-throttled way, speaking up, speaking out, reaching out to the communities that we work with and partnering with them.' And when it comes to Trump's broader agenda? 'They're trying to rewrite the Civil Rights Act. They're trying to undo all of these things that are not the result of policy and politics — they're the result of culture changing, of people's movements for generations,' she said. 'They think they can just go and write a few executive orders and undo generations of social struggles. They're crazy. That's not going to happen.' Stansbury finds hope in younger generations. 'I look at people in my life who are Gen Z and Alpha ... this younger generation doesn't even think about these issues the same way the older generation does,' she said. 'There's not only going not to be a demand for this, there's not going to be any tolerance for this.' But until that future arrives, Stansbury isn't waiting for permission to lead. 'We see you. We're fighting for you,' she said of her message to transgender Americans. 'You're loved, you're cared for, and we see what's happening — and we're going to continue to fight back.'
