Democrats accuse GOP of racism in proposed Texas map
'The truth of the matter is: Somebody has to have the courage to say that it's racism,' Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, told reporters in Austin on Thursday morning. 'Unfortunately, we have grown to the point in this country where you can use racism against people of color, but people of color can't respond and say, 'That's racism.''
The outcry comes in response to a proposed congressional map unveiled on Wednesday by Texas Republicans at Trump's urging. The new lines, if approved, are designed to flip at least five Democratic seats to the GOP, making it much harder for Democrats to seize control of the lower chamber in next year's midterm elections.
The Trump administration, in pushing Texas GOP leaders to redraw the lines, argued the change is needed because the current map gives favor to Black and Latino voters in ways that are illegal. In a letter to Gov. Greg Abbott and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, urged state Republicans 'to rectify these race-based considerations.'
The Democratic critics dismissed that argument as projection, saying the current lines — drawn by Texas state Republicans just four years ago — already give disproportionate voice to white voters, and the newly proposed districts would only exacerbate that lopsided power dynamic.
'Black and brown communities will suffer the most. They're getting torn up across the state,' said Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas). 'In the last few decades, the overwhelming majority of growth in the state of Texas has come from Latino and African American communities. And yet the number of seats that have been drawn to serve those communities has stayed flat or shrunk.
'And so there is racism to this.'
The proposed Texas map targets Democrats in the state's largest cities — Houston, Dallas and Austin — as well as those on the U.S.-Mexico border. Two of those border-district Democrats — Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez — represent regions won by Trump last year.
The Democratic critics of the plan are quick to note that Republicans already control 25 of Texas's 38 seats in the U.S. House — an advantage aided by the lines drawn by Republicans in 2021. They say GOP leaders have to 'cheat' to stay in power because the Republicans' policy agenda — including the sharp Medicaid cuts Trump signed into law earlier this month — are unpopular with voters.
'Politicians who don't want to face the consequences of their votes and their choices can't just change the rules of the game in the middle of it,' Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas) said.
'Texas already has the most racially gerrymandered congressional map in the country, and it's important to know that of Texas's 38 congressional districts — in a state with a majority-minority population, where the population of the state is more than 60 percent minority — only 13 districts allow voters of color to regularly and consistently elect their candidate of choice. And this new map cuts that number down to just eight.'
In years past, the Democratic critics could have leaned on the minority protections provided by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), which had required certain states to get federal pre-approval before changing election rules. The law had applied on a blanket basis to nine states, including Texas, with documented histories of racial discrimination.
That landmark law was weakened in 2013, when conservatives on the Supreme Court struck down the decades-old formula dictating which regions are subject to the additional layer of scrutiny. Twelve years later, Republicans are seeking new ways to eliminate the remaining VRA protections.
Despite the challenges, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said he's hopeful the courts will strike down Texas's proposed map on the grounds that it discriminates against minority voters.
'The current map violates the law,' he said in Austin on Thursday, 'and this congressional map will double and triple down on the extreme racial gerrymandering that is silencing the voices of millions of Texans.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
3 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's plan for White House ballroom sparks outrage from his critics
President Trump's plans to add a massive $200 million ballroom to the White House is angering critics, who see him moving forward with the long-sought project as part of his desire to leave a lasting mark not only on the office of the presidency but the first house as well. The construction of the ballroom, the cost of which the White House says will be covered by Trump and other donors, will begin in September. Trump is also paving the White House Rose Garden (though the rose bushes will be saved), which the White House says is necessary so people can walk more easily for events held in the space. And he's added his personal gold touch to the Oval Office. Trump says he sees the ballroom as a way to add to his legacy. And while detractors say his decorative and more substantial changes are out of touch and ostentatious, he says they are necessary. 'I always said I was going to do something about the ballroom because they should have one,' he told reporters Thursday. 'So we'll be leaving it, it will be a great legacy project. And, I think it will be special.' When asked if any government funds will be used to construct the 90,000 square foot facility, Trump replied, 'no government dollars, no.' The White House said the sprawling event space will be built adjacent to the White House where the East Wing sits. The goal is to complete construction before the end of Trump's term in January 2029. Trump's vision is for a space where he and future presidents can host state dinners, large gatherings with business leaders and other ritzy parties or functions. 'We've been planning it for a long time,' Trump said. 'They've wanted a ballroom at the White House for more than 150 years. There's never been a president that was good at ballrooms. I'm really good.' Democrats and regular Trump critics offered a sharp pushback on his plans. 'This is what DOGE was all about, folks,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a video posted to social media hours after the White House announcement, referring to the president's Department of Government Efficiency. 'Cutting things from you, and giving it not to some place that needed it, giving it to the big shots who run the show, Donald Trump at the top of the list.' Others suggested Trump and his White House were planting an intentional distraction. 'You gotta hand it to MAGAs, for about a week they really did have everyone convinced they cared about kids and The Epstein Files,' journalist and pundit Seth Abramson wrote on social platform X. 'On to more important things! Did you hear Trump is building a $200M ballroom at the White House? Wowee!' The White House pushed back on those criticisms in a Friday statement to The Hill, saying 'as President Trump has said, for over 150 years, many presidents, administrations, and staff have all wanted a ballroom, and now we have a president who will accomplish building it.' 'President Trump is the best builder and developer in the entire world and the American people can rest well knowing that this project is in his hands,' a West Wing spokesperson said. 'Many future presidents and American citizens will enjoy it for generations to come.' The president, a longtime real estate mogul who is known for a hands-on approach in the design and construction of his resorts, golf courses and skyscraper office buildings, has long lamented the lack of sufficient event space at the White House. 'When it rains it's a disaster, and the tent's 100 yards, that's more than a football field away from the main entrance,' Trump said as part of his remarks to the press about the project. 'And people are shlopping down to the tent; it's not a pretty sight. The women with their lovely evening gowns, their hair all done, and they're a mess by the time they get [there].' There is longstanding precedent for presidents and first ladies putting their spin on the White House and its grounds. President Harry Truman oversaw a massive renovation from 1948 to 1952 that required he and his wife to move into the Blair House at the time and saw the White House completely gutted. Former first lady Jackie Kennedy, however, championed the historic preservation of the home and advocated that extreme renovations require oversight from the Committee for the Preservation of the White House. 'Every president and first family does make a mark on the White House — they already are a part of history and that snapshot in time,' said Anita McBride, former chief of staff to then-first lady Laura Bush. 'Since the cornerstone was laid, there have been additions, there have been changes that, at the time those happened, raised concerns.' The White House Historical Association welcomed Trump's planned ballroom. 'The history of the White House has evolved over 233 years since the cornerstone was laid in 1792. The South Portico, the North Portico, the East Wing, the West Wing, and the Truman Balcony all raised concerns at the time — but today, we can't imagine the White House without these iconic elements,' Stewart D. McLaurin, president of the association, told The Hill. He added, 'Since our founding by First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy in 1961, we have supported and partnered with every president and first lady caring for and adding to the White House and its Collection. We work to preserve the history of this remarkable museum, home, and office for generations to come.' Some agree with the president that a bigger events space at the White House is long overdue. 'I can understand why someone who thinks on a grand scale, as obviously President Trump does, would want this ballroom added,' said Barbara Perry, a presidential historian and co-chair of the Presidential Oral History Program at the University of Virginia's Miller Center. 'That being said, the optics for people who disagree with this president, it will probably have an impact on how they view this.' McBride agreed that the tents on the lawn, which have been constructed during more recent administrations, are not ideal. 'That doesn't come without challenges, putting up staging, putting up a covered structure, getting people to the actual location; dealing with inclement weather. And you're not really having your event in the White House,' she said. 'So you can see where that makes sense.' There are lingering questions about what the new ballroom location will mean for the staffers who work in the East Wing, which is where first lady's staff works. The East Wing is also where tours of the White House for the public are conducted. 'Betty Ford always called the East Wing the 'heart' of the White House,' McBride said. 'All the business and policy gets done in the West Wing, that's critically important. But the heart of the White House is the East Wing. And so what, what will be the new East Wing?' Others see the construction of an opulent addition to the president's residence as a matter of bad timing and poor optics given sluggish jobs reports and fears about how global tariffs might hurt the U.S. economy. 'This isn't something that's going to make or break another election, but it does add another page to the catalog of hypocrisy that these people read from when they want to lecture Americans about fiscal responsibility,' said Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic political strategist. 'It's a visible middle finger to working class Americans, many of whom voted for him.'
The Hill
3 minutes ago
- The Hill
Appeals court upholds order barring DHS from immigration sweeps based on language, job
A federal appeals court upheld a lower ruling on Friday barring the Trump administration from solely considering race, language or employment as reasonable suspicion to detain migrants. Their decision blocks Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials from conducting 'indiscriminate immigration operations' as alleged by the plaintiffs in court filings. A group of five immigrants and four civil rights organizations filed a filed a lawsuit in early July alleging that immigration operations are based on racial bias, reporting harassment as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents flooded street corners, bus stops, parking lots, agricultural sites, day laborer corners and other places with checkpoints. On July 12, Judge Maame E. Frimpong, a Biden appointee, issued the temporary restraining order after he said he was presented with a 'mountain of evidence' proving ICE's arrests and stops were unconstitutional, according to The Associated Press. A day before Frimpong's ruling, 200 California farm workers were arrested resulting in at least one death. Communities in the Golden State have been protesting the deportation raids and arrests, citing cruelties. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said if the Trump administration is not purposefully targeting individuals and communities, Frimpong's order should not block their efforts. 'If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion,' the panel of three judges wrote, per the AP. A future hearing for the order is slated for September as reported by the newswire. For now, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D-Calif.) celebrated the ruling as a protective covering for local residents. 'The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now,' she said in a Friday statement.
The Hill
3 minutes ago
- The Hill
The left is trying to use international ‘lawfare' to shut down Musk and X
Elon Musk had three recent posts on X that are worth noting if you are opposed to censorship and cancellation. The first was two cartoon panels with the question, 'How do you tell who's telling the Truth?' The next panel offered the answer: 'The ones trying to silence other people are the ones lying.' Just prior to that, Musk had reposted a post that reads, 'President Trump's State Department has announced it is coming to the defense of Elon Musk's X after France labeled it an organized crime group and opened a criminal investigation. The State Department's DLR [the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor] stated, 'As part of a criminal investigation, an activist French prosecutor is requesting information on X's proprietary algorithm and has classified X as an 'organized crime group.' Democratic governments should allow all voices to be heard, not silence speech they dislike. The United States will defend the free speech of all Americans against acts of foreign censorship.'' And just prior to that, Musk reposted a post from the conservative activist Mark Kern: 'There is a full on attack on the Internet by the UK and EU, disguised as 'for the children.' The ID requirement is affecting even Discord users and X users. It is full on dystopian as they ramp up police to arrest people for speech.' Below that is a link to a Telegraph article with the headline 'Elite Police Squad to Monitor Anti-Migrant Posts on Social Media.' Multiple people I have spoken with in the U.S., the U.K. and the EU believe that Musk and his X platform represent the greatest single threat to the far left and its goal of pushing its narratives unchallenged across the globe. One way the left now seems intent on stopping Musk and X is by mimicking the various 'lawfare' schemes rolled out against then-candidate Donald Trump prior to the 2024 election, which many Trump supporters saw as an unethical attempt to force him out of the race. While that 'lawfare' tactic failed — thanks in large part to Trump taking it head-on, day after day, while exposing it for what it was — activists in Europe and elsewhere believe the strategy can be refined and hardened for use against Musk and X in an attempt to intimidate, censor or silence them. Lest we forget, back in 2023, the European Union opened a probe into X for alleged 'failure to counter illegal content and disinformation.' Ah. The catch-all accusation frequently used by the intelligentsia on the left: 'disinformation.' Recall the draconian COVID-19 dictates from the left enacted to combat 'disinformation'? Here is a January headline from ABC News: 'EU politicians warn against Elon Musk's incursions into European politics.' Of course, Musk might rightfully retort that his 'disinformation' and 'incursions' were not only protected free speech, but simply ways to point out severe double-standards and harmful policies that were having an adverse effect upon the majority of the citizens of those nations. I wrote a piece for this site a year ago titled ' Could Elon Musk actually be arrested and X cancelled?' I highlighted calls for Musk to be arrested for stating his opinions while anticipating that the personal animus directed against him, X and the internet by certain individuals and groups in Europe advocating for censorship and cancellation could grow. It now seems that I was correct. All of which raises an obvious question:Why do so many on the left want to prevent people around the world from gathering as much information as possible on their own, then coming to their own conclusions based on their own research? Do they fear people thinking for themselves? Do they fear their own constituents, customers and neighbors? Open minds open doors. I have always believed it imperative to listen to those I may disagree with. What if I am wrong and they are correct? What if they show me a truth I refused to believe out of ignorance, intolerance or indoctrination? Aren't I the one getting a gift — one I could not receive if their voices were censored or canceled? Alarmingly, many on the left in Europe — as well as in the U.S. — don't seem to share my belief that we need to listen to those we disagree with. Note this April headline from The New York Times: 'E.U. Prepares Major Penalties Against Elon Musk's X.' The opening paragraph of the article spells it out: 'European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against Elon Musk's social media platform, X, for breaking a landmark law to combat illicit content and disinformation, said four people with knowledge of the plans.' Once again, the left rolls out 'illicit content and disinformation' against Musk, X and the internet. Of course, millions around the world who are against censorship and cancellation and strongly in favor of free speech might say this is a transparent attempt by some on the left to intimidate and censor a site and voices that expose their continual failures to billions of people around the world. One person's 'disinformation' is another's 'irrefutable truth.' Don't hide behind censorship. Let the people think for themselves.
