logo
5 things to know as California moves forward with redistricting

5 things to know as California moves forward with redistricting

The Hilla day ago
California Democrats are moving forward with plans to potentially redraw the state's congressional maps as a response to GOP-led redistricting efforts in Texas.
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has said the Golden State is planning to put redistricting before voters during a special election this November, with the aim of adding several Democratic House seats to the blue stronghold.
California's move is a direct response to redistricting efforts in Republican-led Texas, where Democratic state legislators have fled the state in a last-ditch bid to block a redraw backed by President Trump.
Here's what to know as California moves forward:
Why is Newsom calling for a special election?
Newsom announced Friday that his state will move forward with plans to get a measure on the ballot that would, if approved by voters during a special election, let Democrats pass a new House map.
California state lawmakers are out for summer recess, with plans to return on Aug. 18. They're expected to take up the matter as soon as they return, as they're up against a deadline to make a November special election official.
'We have 'til Aug. 22nd. With the leadership behind me, they will get this on the ballot,' the governor said.
Newsom needs to call a special election to move forward because California, unlike Texas, has a bipartisan commission that is responsible for redistricting every decade. In order to circumvent the commission and redraw mid-cycle, he must put the redistricting question directly in front of voters to seek their approval before a new map can be put in place.
The push to draw new congressional lines in the Golden State comes as Democrats across the country are looking to blunt potential gains in Texas ahead of the midterms. The Lone Star State is expected to pick up as many as five additional seats with their new lines, making it potentially easier for the GOP to hold onto its slim House majority next year despite electoral headwinds.
Newsom has repeatedly said that he will only move forward with redistricting if Texas does so, but since the Lone Star State has signaled it has no intention of backing down, it seems likely the California governor will go forward with the special election.
What will voters be asked to consider?
The exact details of the ballot question remain unclear, raising questions about how the plan will move forward, even if voters approve it.
Newsom's office has underscored the potential ballot measure would reaffirm California's commitment to independent redistricting, while also allowing voters to 'temporarily adjust' the congressional map for the next several cycles. But how the question will actually be formulated remains up in the air.
The measure is also expected to include 'trigger' language, explaining how and who decides to move forward with redistricting in the Golden State if it happens in Texas or elsewhere.
There's also the possibility, however unlikely, that the Texas GOP will not move forward with redistricting, thereby negating Newsom's push to redraw California's lines. However, most observers see this as an unlikely outcome.
Another possibility is that California voters don't approve redistricting. The chances of that happening in the deep-blue state also appear remote, though some experts say the popularity of the independent commission, which Californians approved in 2008 and 2010, may stoke hesitance about the proposed changes.
'I think the voters understand what's at stake,' Newsom said when asked about this last potential outcome.
When could new maps go into effect?
California's goal would be to counteract the planned GOP gains in Texas during next year's midterms, and the ballot measure would aim to push the changes through before the midterm election in November 2026.
If the maps go through, the mid-census redistricting will last 'for the '26, '28 and '30 ballots, just for congressional ballots alone,' Newsom said on Friday.
Proponents of the plan have stressed that the proposal would maintain the framework of California's independent redistricting commission, though the bipartisan body's maps would be effectively paused in the meantime.
California would then revert to the existing system after the next census at the end of the decade.
The proposal appears to be a 'a one-time request to voters to subvert the commission, if other states were to engage in such a process,' Sara Sadhwani, a member of the commission that redrew California's lines in 2021 and a politics professor at Pomona College, told The Hill last week.
What could the new maps look like?
California's Democratic leaders have said they're planning to release new congressional map proposals sometime this week.
The exact contours of the new maps are unclear, but Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the chair of the California Democratic Congressional delegation, told local outlet KCRA 3 over the weekend that they're expected to target five House Republicans.
That would be an exact counter to the five GOP seats that would be created by the Texas plan.
Such a change would boost Democrats' advantage in the congressional delegation to a whopping 48 of 52 House seats, by cutting into the districts held by the state's current nine Republican lawmakers.
Among the potential targets are Republican Reps. Ken Calvert, Darrell Issa, David Valadao, Doug LaMalfa and Kevin Kiley.
What opposition does the push face?
Newsom's move has drawn criticism from some notable figures — perhaps no one more so than former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who has threatened to campaign against the plan, according to Politico.
2024 Election Coverage
'He calls gerrymandering evil, and he means that. He thinks it's truly evil for politicians to take power from people,' spokesperson Daniel Ketchell told the news outlet. 'He's opposed to what Texas is doing, and he's opposed to the idea that California would race to the bottom to do the same thing.'
Kiley, another California Republican who could be vulnerable under the new maps, has also emerged as a vocal critic of the plan. The lawmaker has proposed federal legislation that would prohibit mid-decade redistricting nationwide.
Furthermore, the unprecedented plan is entering 'legal murkiness,' said Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University who founded the database All About Redistricting — while also being pressed for time, given the November goal and scheduling rules for special elections.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Congress must hear from Jeffrey Epstein's victims about Ghislaine Maxwell's role
Congress must hear from Jeffrey Epstein's victims about Ghislaine Maxwell's role

USA Today

time16 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Congress must hear from Jeffrey Epstein's victims about Ghislaine Maxwell's role

Trump is openly mulling a pardon for a known liar who could benefit from spinning a favorable tale about him, while two Congress members are using their posts to give the women she victimized a voice. Lawyers for a convicted child sex trafficker got right to the point recently while seeking to prevent the public release of testimony from the grand jury that indicted her. "Jeffrey Epstein is dead. Ghislaine Maxwell is not," they wrote in an Aug. 5 legal brief, opposing the release of those records. That blunt and binary assessment – Epstein died from an apparent suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, Maxwell is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence – didn't have much to say about the other people involved in this metastasizing scandal in Donald Trump's second term as president: the victimized underage girls who are still seeking justice years later. Maxwell has been the center of attention – and, so far, a beneficiary of it – in this scandal. But in three weeks, we'll focus instead on some of those victims. Sounds like they have plenty to share about her. House Speaker Johnson wants Epstein files to just go away U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, have jointly announced that they will hold a Sept. 3 news conference at the U.S. Capitol to hear from those victims and their attorneys while pressing for passage of their bipartisan legislation to release what has become known as the "Epstein files." That bill, the Epstein Files Transparency Act, has 11 Republican and 33 Democratic cosponsors. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, found a vote on that bill so concerning in July that he sent the House members home early for the summer break to avoid it. Opinion: Epstein accomplice Maxwell angles for a Trump pardon. Would she lie to help him? "We're not going to play political games with this," Johnson said at a July 22 news conference while openly, publicly playing political games to snuff out a bipartisan move for transparency. Johnson's punt bought a little time for Trump, who used to hang out with Epstein and Maxwell and has been haunted of late by a 2002 New York magazine interview, in which he said Epstein was "a lot of fun to be with" and "likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." All eyes now on Ghislaine Maxwell and possible pardon But this isn't going away, despite Trump's flailing efforts to quiet the controversy. And Massie and Khanna are platforming exactly who we need to hear from in this scandal – the victims – while Maxwell's turn in the congressional spotlight is still very much up in the air. She was subpoenaed in July to testify from behind bars this week for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. But that was postponed indefinitely, in part because Maxwell has an appeal for her conviction being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court and because she demanded congressional immunity, and the committee refused. That's a rare setback for Maxwell, who has used her infamy to rack up something of a winning streak as Trump struggles with the Epstein scandal. Maxwell, who was convicted of recruiting underage victims and coaching them to have sex with Epstein while sometimes joining in, got her way when a federal judge in New York on Aug. 11 declined to release that grand jury testimony. Two days of secretive interviews in July with a top Department of Justice official – who once served as Trump's private lawyer – won Maxwell a transfer from a women's prison in Florida to a much cushier federal camp in Texas. Her lawyers are now angling to win her a pardon from Trump, something he feels regularly obliged to note publicly that he is allowed to do. Opinion: Republicans in Congress head home to angry voters. So much for summer break. So Trump is openly mulling a pardon for a known liar who could benefit from spinning a favorable tale about him in this scandal. And Massie and Khanna are using their congressional posts to give voice to those Maxwell victimized for Epstein. Really, who are you rooting for here? If you find yourself on Team Maxwell, a growing chorus among many of Trump's most MAGA media supporters, you're going to bat for a woman who recruited and sexually abused children. That's ugly stuff, a perversion of political partisanship so profoundly grotesque that it has broken through and overcome that constant stream of chaos Trump has been deploying to distract America. This scandal won't dissipate in the summer heat, just because that's what Trump wants. American voters – Republicans, Democrats and independents – are calling for transparency. Congress must provide it. Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.

Trump Hides Barack Obama's Portrait, And Gavin Newsom Sums Up Why In Just 6 Words
Trump Hides Barack Obama's Portrait, And Gavin Newsom Sums Up Why In Just 6 Words

Yahoo

time39 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump Hides Barack Obama's Portrait, And Gavin Newsom Sums Up Why In Just 6 Words

President Donald Trump may be tall, but he continues to prove that deep down inside he's a teeny tiny little baby man. Case in point, according to CNN, Trump decided to essentially hide former president Barack Obama's official portrait from the White House — and Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) is calling the move like he sees it. Typically, White House protocol calls for portraits of the most recent American presidents to be featured prominently in the entrance way, so that they're visible during official events and visitors on tours. But Trump directed staff to move Robert McCurdy's photorealistic paintingof the 44th president to the top of the Grand Staircase into a corner where most can't see it. CNN, who obtained a photo of the portrait's new location, also noted that it's now hanging on a landing leading into a private residence that is heavily restricted. Portraits of former presidents George W. Bush and his father, George H. W. Bush, have also been moved to the same location. A portrait of Trump's most recent predecessor, Joe Biden, has not yet been completed — and once it is, we're sure Trump will find a nice home for it in the White House's basement. Or he'll just pave over it, like the rose garden. When news of Trump's latest jab at Obama made its way to Newsom, he only needed six words to sum up why Trump would do this. 'Small men hide from history's giants,' Newsom wrote in a post on X, formerly Twitter. This is not the first time Trump has moved Obama's portrait. In April, it was removed from the Grand Foyer and replaced by a painting of Trump — complete with a gold frame ― pumping his fist in the air after last year's attempted assassination in Butler, Pennsylvania. Obama's portrait then hung in the East Room, until it got demoted to its dusty corner. Trump's interior design move comes amid high tensions between the president and Obama. Last month, Trump accused Obama of participating in a 'coup' against him in 2016 — an allegation Obama later called 'outrageous.' Trump has beef with the Bush family as well. George W. Bush, whom Trump has called a 'failed president,' skipped Trump's first inauguration. In 2017, the late George H. W. Bush called Trump a 'blowhard,' and said he voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.

More than 20 GOP attorneys general call on RFK Jr, FDA to reinstate safeguards for abortion drugs
More than 20 GOP attorneys general call on RFK Jr, FDA to reinstate safeguards for abortion drugs

Fox News

timean hour ago

  • Fox News

More than 20 GOP attorneys general call on RFK Jr, FDA to reinstate safeguards for abortion drugs

Print Close By Landon Mion Published August 13, 2025 EXCLUSIVE: More than 20 Republican attorneys general are demanding that the Trump administration reinstate safety protocols for the abortion drug mifepristone, saying it poses "serious risks to women." In a letter obtained by Fox News Digital, 22 attorneys general called on Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Food and Drugs Administration head Martin Makary to bring back safeguards for the pills that were scrapped by the Obama and Biden administrations. "Recent comprehensive studies of the real-world effects of the chemical abortion drug mifepristone report that serious adverse events occur 22 times more often than stated on the drug's label, while the drug is less than half as effective as claimed. These facts directly contradict the drug's primary marketing message of 'safe' and 'effective,'" the letter reads, citing studies published earlier this year by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPA), a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group. The EPPA report claims the pill presents harm to women, causing 1 in 10 patients to experience a "serious adverse event," including hemorrhage, emergency room visits and ectopic pregnancy. FDA CHIEF HAS 'NO PLANS' FOR ABORTION PILL POLICY CHANGES BUT CONTINUES SAFETY REVIEW The letter, led by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, comes after Kennedy Jr. asked Makary to review the latest data on mifepristone and its safety. "Based on that review, the FDA should consider reinstating safety protocols that it identified as necessary as recently as 2011 in its issuance of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for mifepristone, but which were removed by the Obama and Biden administrations," the letter reads, adding that the drug should be taken off the market if safeguards cannot be put in place. "Alternatively, in light of the serious risks to women who are presently being prescribed this drug without crucial safeguards, and in the event the FDA is unable to reinstate the 2011 safety protocols for mifepristone, the FDA should consider withdrawing mifepristone from the market until it completes its review and can decide on a course of action based on objective safety and efficacy criteria," the attorneys general wrote. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., also sent a letter to Kennedy Jr. last month urging him to take immediate action to reinstate safety guardrails on mifepristone following the secretary's commitment to conducting a safety review of the drug. Makary had previously said that he had no plans to modify policies surrounding mifepristone but that the FDA would act if the data suggested there was a safety issue. Mifepristone, which is taken with another drug called misoprostol to end an early pregnancy, was first approved by the FDA in 2000 after "a thorough and comprehensive review" found it was safe and effective, according to the agency's website, which noted that periodic reviews since its approval have not identified new safety concerns. Last year, the Supreme Court rejected a challenge targeting the drug's availability. The plaintiffs had sought to restrict access to mifepristone across the country, including in Democrat-led states where abortion remains legal. The court did not rule on whether the FDA acted lawfully when it moved during the Obama and Biden administrations to ease the rules for mifepristone's use that had been established during the Clinton administration. Medication abortions made up more than half of all abortions in the U.S. health care system in 2023, according to a study by the Guttmacher Institute. MEDICAL GROUPS URGE FDA, KENNEDY TO REEXAMINE BROAD APPROVAL OF ABORTION DRUGS CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP "Currently, a woman can obtain a mifepristone abortion by participating in only one telehealth visit with any approved healthcare provider (not necessarily a physician), ordering the drugs through a mail-order pharmacy, and self-administering them," the attorneys general wrote. "And the prescriber is only required to report an adverse event if he or she becomes aware that the patient has died." "The FDA's removal of these crucial safety protocols in 2016 (and in 2023) that only five years before the FDA considered necessary begs the question of whether the removal was motivated by considerations other than the safety of patients … The current FDA's dedication to the health and wellbeing of all Americans is encouraging, as is the much-needed review of mifepristone that Secretary Kennedy has promised," the letter concludes. Print Close URL

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store