Trump's new congressional map in Texas still stymied as Gavin Newsom urges president to give up
Texas Republicans were unable again Monday to approve new congressional districts to meet U.S. President Donald Trump's demands as California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats urged Republicans to stand down and avoid a partisan brawl spanning multiple statehouses.
Texas Democratic lawmakers remained outside of Texas after leaving the state to deny their GOP colleagues the quorum necessary to vote on Trump's aggressive redistricting play and push the stalemate into its second week. The president's agenda also spurred Democratic governors, including Newsom, to pledge retaliatory redistricting efforts in their states — setting up the possibility of an extended standoff that could upend the 2026 midterm elections.
Newsom urged Trump in a letter Monday to abandon his scheme, telling the president he is 'playing with fire' and 'risking the destabilization of our democracy.'
At the Texas Capitol, House Speaker Dustin Burrows adjourned another attempted session within minutes of its early afternoon opening. He used the brief gathering to chastise dozens of Democrats who have civil warrants out for their arrest. Because they are out of state, those lawmakers are beyond the reach of state authorities.
Burrows said Texas law enforcement agencies have been to the residences of the absent legislators, 'conducting surveillance, knocking on doors' and calling their cellphones trying to bring them to the statehouse.
'The search continues, and it will not stop,' the speaker said. Later he added, 'Eventually you will be here.'
Just a few seats could determine control of Congress
Burrows' GOP House majority wants to redraw districts so that five more Republicans can be elected. Trump is pushing other Republican-controlled legislatures to follow suit as he tries to avoid a repeat of the 2018 midterms. Those elections during Trump's first presidency yielded a new Democratic majority in the U.S. House that stymied his agenda and twice impeached him. Existing maps nationally put Democrats within three seats of a House majority at a time when there are only several dozen competitive districts out of 435.
Texas Democrats intend to run out the clock on their current special session, which cannot extend beyond Aug. 19. But Gov. Greg Abbott said he'll call lawmakers back to the Statehouse again and again until enough Democrats show up to reach the attendance threshold required to vote on the bill.
Responding to Texas, Newsom and other California Democrats are considering new boundaries to yield a five-seat shift toward Democrats, neutralizing any Texas change. That would require, however, getting California voters to set aside existing maps drawn by an independent commission. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker have promised similar efforts in their Democratic-run statehouses.
In his letter to Trump, Newsom said he prefers that independent bodies draw political districts rather than partisan legislatures, as is done in Texas and most GOP-controlled states. But, Newsom wrote, 'California cannot stand idly by as this power grab unfolds.'
If Texas and 'the other states call off their redistricting efforts,' the governor added, 'we will happily do the same. And American democracy will be better for it.'
The absent Texas lawmakers are staying in Illinois, New York and elsewhere — and say they have no intentions of returning as long as Republicans are intent on mollifying Trump.
'Democrats, especially in Texas, are standing firm,' said Rep. Rhetta Bowers at a gathering of Texas lawmakers Monday in Illinois.
Democrats urged Abbott to focus on flood response and he declined
Abbott and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a U.S. Senate candidate, want state courts to remove Democratic lawmakers, asserting that they have abandoned their posts.
'If they show back up in the state of Texas, they will be arrested and taken to the Capitol,' Abbott promised over the weekend on 'Fox News Sunday.'
Paxton has asked an Illinois court to enforce the Texas warrants issued for absent lawmakers so they could be arrested beyond Texas' borders. At the very least, they face $500 daily fines for each absence under legislative rules.
Bowers and others have said they remain undeterred. She compared both the proposed Texas maps, which would disproportionately affect districts represented by Black and Latino Democrats, and Abbott's and Paxton's threats to the Civil Rights Movement in the mid-20th century.
Republicans, she said, are using 'the very same tactics used against Black and brown Americans' who pushed for passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
'Their fight is our fight, and just like the Civil Rights heroes of the past, no matter the cost we are prepared to see it through to the end,' Bowers said.
Back in Austin, Burrows never mentioned the redistricting legislation, instead highlighting that the special session also includes several disaster response measures after catastrophic floods that killed at least 135 people in the state. He said those bills are set for action on the floor Tuesday morning.
'The only thing standing between Texas and real disaster relief is whether our absent colleagues decide to show up tomorrow,' Burrows said.
In fact, Texas Democrats urged Abbott and GOP legislative leaders to call a session devoted only to flood response. Abbott declined, intentionally pairing the matter with Trump's agenda in the same session.
—-
Barrow reported from Atlanta. Associated Press reporter Jesse Bedayn contributed from Denver.
Bill Barrow, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
9 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Quebec says Bill 21 opponents are trying to overturn established law
The Quebec government says legal opponents challenging its secularism law at the Supreme Court of Canada are merely rehashing old, failed arguments in an effort to overturn established legal precedent. On Tuesday, Quebec filed 100 pages of legal arguments to the Supreme Court ahead of a hearing in which it will defend Bill 21 in court for a third time. The province won two previous decisions in the lower courts in Quebec, which led to the current appeal at the Supreme Court. Quebec's Bill 21, enacted in 2019, bans public sector workers, including teachers, from wearing religious symbols such as hijabs on the job. The province's goal is to promote secularism in Quebec, but critics argue it is an attack on minority rights. Record number of groups to speak at Supreme Court case against Quebec secularism law Quebec has won two court battles for overriding Charter rights to implement its secularism law. Now the fight hits the Supreme Court The Bill 21 case represents a landmark hearing at the Supreme Court, where the country's top court will consider governments' ability to override the rights and freedoms of Canadians in detail for the first time in almost four decades. The provincial government used Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the notwithstanding clause, to shield the secularism law from constitutional challenges on the basis of freedom of religion and other rights. The province's Tuesday filing says opponents are trying to circumvent its proper use of Section 33. In French, the filing says such arguments are asking the Supreme Court 'to amend established law.' Quebec further said its opponents are using legal arguments that have previously failed and that the challengers have not exposed errors in last year's Quebec Court of Appeal decision on Bill 21, which broadly upheld the provincial government's actions. The appeal court, Quebec said in its filing, 'conducted a detailed and meticulous analysis of all the arguments raised by the appellants and rightly dismissed them.' The key precedent is a 1988 case called Ford, where the Supreme Court considered Section 33 on a narrow legal basis but didn't delve in deeper questions about the notwithstanding clause. The Supreme Court at the time said the 'essential requirement' is for a government that uses Section 33 to name the Charter sections it aims to override. The basis of Quebec's Bill 21 argument is that the Ford decision is a precedent that should not be reconsidered. In Bill 21, Quebec stated it was using Section 33 to override the 10 sections of the Charter to which the notwithstanding clause can apply. But in the decades since Ford, and especially in recent years as more provincial governments have used Section 33 to shield laws, legal academics and others have argued there may be more for the top court to say about the notwithstanding clause. That includes whether it can be invoked pre-emptively, as Quebec did with Bill 21, or whether a court can declare rights have been violated even if a law is allowed to continue to operate because of Section 33. This week, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal said there is room for such judicial declarations. Last year, the Quebec appeal court came to the opposite conclusion. Six groups are appealing last year's Quebec Court of Appeal decision. They filed their legal arguments in mid-April. The appellants want the Supreme Court to overturn Bill 21. Among the arguments is a call to reconsider the 1988 Ford precedent. Further arguments include looking at other parts of the Charter, the Constitution, Canada's history and the limits of provincial powers to question the validity of Quebec's use of Section 33 in Bill 21. In Quebec's arguments filed Tuesday, the province said the Bill 21 case 'does not raise any new issues distinct from those considered in Ford.' Quebec then suggested that two of the appellants are effectively trying to rewrite Section 33 of the Charter 'to add conditions that are not found there.' A Bill 21 hearing has not been scheduled, but it could happen this winter. Supreme Court Chief Justice Richard Wagner has said it could be heard over three days. Most Supreme Court hearings take one day; rare cases occupy two days. The landmark Bill 21 case has attracted a record number of intervenors, as 38 outside groups will present written legal arguments to the court by mid-September. The federal government is also set to file its legal arguments at the same time, alongside six provincial attorneys-general, including Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta. Ottawa has previously expressed concern about provincial governments pre-emptively invoking Section 33.
CTV News
9 minutes ago
- CTV News
Yukon, Alaska sign agreement to address missing and murdered Indigenous people
The coat of arms of Yukon is seen on the outside of the Yukon Legislative Building, in Whitehorse, on Wednesday, July 23, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck WHITEHORSE — WHITEHORSE — The Yukon has signed an agreement with the state of Alaska to address the crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous people. The territorial government says the memorandum of understanding was initiated in April 2024 and was signed in Whitehorse on Tuesday. It says in a news release that the document marks a 'significant milestone' that will strengthen cross-border collaboration. The territory says it will unite efforts and enhance communication to improve safety and better respond to gender-based violence in northern communities. It says the agreement fulfils a milestone under the Yukon's strategy for responding to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. The territory says Yukon and American officials met after the signing ceremony to exchange expertise. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 12, 2025.
CBC
10 minutes ago
- CBC
PC, Liberal candidates split 2 provincial byelections in P.E.I.
Byelections in two provincial districts ultimately had no effect on the balance of power in the P.E.I. Legislature. Liberal candidate Carolyn Simpson won District 9, solidifying the party's status as Official Opposition, while Kent Dollar's victory in District 15 adds a 20th seat to the Progressive Conservatives' majority. CBC's Cody MacKay has the details.
