California Republicans sue to block Democratic redistricting plan
The Republicans argue in their emergency petition to the California Supreme Court that the state constitution bars consideration of the redistricting plan until September 18 because new legislation requires a 30-day review period before lawmakers may act on it.
The four Republicans who filed the suit on Monday asked the court to block Democratic lawmakers from moving forward with the legislation until September 18, absent a three-fourths vote the petition says would otherwise be required of each chamber to proceed sooner.
The petition asks the state Supreme Court to rule on the merits of the lawsuit by Wednesday or to stay the legislative process in Sacramento while the case remains under judicial review.
California Democrats currently face an August 22 deadline to pass all three bills of the redistricting plan to meet Newsom's goal of placing the newly drawn political maps on the ballot for a special statewide election on November 4. The lawsuit comes as Newsom seeks a tit-for-tat expansion of California's Democratic delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives to offset a redistricting effort pursued in Texas at the behest of President Donald Trump that would net five more House seats for Republicans.
Trump's redistricting fight could spread to other states as California looks to replicate Texas GOP plan
Republicans now hold a narrow 219-212 majority in the U.S. House, with the battle for control of Congress expected to be closely fought in the November 2026 midterm election.
Newsom and his fellow Democrats have characterized their bid to depart from the state's independent, bipartisan redistricting process – adopted by voters in 2008 – as a temporary 'emergency' strategy to neutralize what they see as extreme moves by Trump and the Republicans to rig the system.
The redistricting effort pushed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott broke with a tradition in which lawmakers draw new electoral maps only after the once-per-decade census.
Democrats also argued that the Republican proposal would disenfranchise minority voters by weakening their political clout.
A special session Abbott called to pass the Republican plan led to a two-week walkout by more than 50 Democrats in the Texas House of Representatives, who left the state to deny the legislative quorum necessary to pass Republicans' plan.
The Texas Democrats returned to the Austin statehouse on Monday, saying they had achieved their goal of temporarily thwarting the Republicans while prompting Democratic-led states, such as California, to consider mid-decade redistricting moves of their own.
State Democrats return to Texas, ending walkout that stymied vote to redraw congressional map
But Texas Republican leaders immediately initiated a crackdown on newly returning Democrats, requiring they be permitted to come and go from the state Capitol only if they signed a paper agreeing to be placed under escort of a state police officer who would ensure they were present for legislative sessions going forward.
Several Democrats bristled at the escorts, calling the restriction a political stunt that was wasting public money.
One legislator, Texas House Representative Nicole Collier, protested the move by refusing to sign the required permission slip and spending the entire night in the statehouse rather than consent to being placed in the custody of a police escort.
Texas Republicans, newly assured of a quorum, planned to take up their redistricting measure on Wednesday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
29 minutes ago
- National Post
Colby Cosh: Homeless people ridiculously exempt from Nova Scotia's forest ban
CBC News' industrious Taryn Grant gives us a fresh occasion to peep at Nova Scotia, that parched corner of Hades wherein it is currently forbidden to go for an invigorating saunter in the woods. A couple of weeks ago I discussed the controversial and suffocatingly broad travel restrictions imposed by the province in response to dangerous wildfire conditions. Nova Scotia, not content with everyday tools of regulation like campfire or vehicle bans, has almost totally denied its citizens access even to privately owned woodlands. When critics outside the province yoinked a few questioning eyebrows upward, they were told they failed to understand the precious communitarian spirit of Nova Scotia or its particular vulnerability to forest fire. Article content Article content Well, let's concede that the government of Nova Scotia is answerable primarily to the people of Nova Scotia. In our usual sunny, optimistic way, I scanned for the glint of a silver lining in the exotic, ambitious ban on walking in or through the forest. Perhaps, I remarked, it betokened a new no-nonsense approach to the regulation of public amenities. Article content Article content Article content 'If 'extremism in defence of public property is no vice' is to be the new rule in Canada, we are surely going to see a lot of big changes to urban public parks and other land patches, which, for a decade, have been beset by nomadic tent-dwellers who make copious and inveterate use of propane tanks, electrical heaters, camp stoves, improvised wiring from hijacked power supplies, and open fires.' Article content Well, don't hold your breath. The CBC has now inquired into the possibility that some members of the Wandering Fire-Bringer class may be testing the Nova Scotia fire ban. Turns out it's made of vapour. The province's Department of Opportunities and Social Development estimates that an estimated 137 rough sleepers are still living in the Nova Scotia woods and 'cannot be convinced' to leave. They've been visited repeatedly by a team of 'outreach workers' who themselves enjoy an exemption from the travel rules. A few of the tent-dwellers, worn down by social-worker nattering, agreed to move on or accept spaces in urban shelters. Most have stayed put as if they'd grown roots. Article content Article content And the state turns out to be helpless, even though one fire may already have been started at an 'encampment.' It seems to be generally agreed that there is no point in fining any of the fairy folk of the forest. The provision in the provincial fire proclamation that allows for $25,000 penalties is reserved exclusively for those who might conceivably have such a sum to cough up. Article content Well, what about the ordinary police powers of arrest and detention? After a fortnight of hearing Nova Scotians insist that the current forest-fire risks are unprecedented, and that the traditional mobility privileges of citizenship must necessarily shrivel into abeyance, I am suddenly assured by a legal-aid lawyer that anyone collared for being unlawfully encamped 'would have to be quickly released, as the offence would not warrant being detained.' Article content This ultra-confident prediction leaves me confused. One struggles to understand, from outside N.S., how forest protection can be so important as to justify a ministerial fiat of extraordinary and unprecedented character — but not so important as to be at all enforced. Article content
Globe and Mail
29 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Quebec liquor board prepares to destroy $300,000 worth of U.S. alcohol banned from stores
The Quebec liquor board may be forced to destroy $300,000 worth of American alcohol that the province has banned from stores. The provincial government on March 4 ordered the state-owned corporation to empty shelves of U.S. alcohol in response to tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump. At the time, other provinces including Ontario and Alberta directed their liquor regulators to stop buying all American alcohol, while B.C. banned liquor from 'red states' that voted for Trump in the 2024 election. Sales of U.S. spirits in Canada fall 66%, industry groups say U.S. alcohol purchased before the boycott is being stored, but Quebec's liquor board says that unless the government changes its guidelines it will have to destroy some products when they expire. The corporation says the affected products are mainly rosé and boxed wines, ready-to-drink cocktails, and certain beers and liqueurs not suitable for prolonged storage. The liquor board says the $300,000 worth of stock represents only a small portion of the $27-million of American products in storage.
National Post
29 minutes ago
- National Post
Colby Cosh: Homeless people exempt from Nova Scotia's forest ban
CBC News' industrious Taryn Grant gives us a fresh occasion to peep at Nova Scotia, that parched corner of Hades wherein it is currently forbidden to go for an invigorating saunter in the woods. A couple of weeks ago I discussed the controversial and suffocatingly broad travel restrictions imposed by the province in response to dangerous wildfire conditions. Nova Scotia, not content with everyday tools of regulation like campfire or vehicle bans, has almost totally denied its citizens access even to privately owned woodlands. When critics outside the province yoinked a few questioning eyebrows upward, they were told they failed to understand the precious communitarian spirit of Nova Scotia or its particular vulnerability to forest fire. Article content Article content Well, let's concede that the government of Nova Scotia is answerable primarily to the people of Nova Scotia. In our usual sunny, optimistic way, I scanned for the glint of a silver lining in the exotic, ambitious ban on walking in or through the forest. Perhaps, I remarked, it betokened a new no-nonsense approach to the regulation of public amenities. Article content Article content 'If 'extremism in defence of public property is no vice' is to be the new rule in Canada, we are surely going to see a lot of big changes to urban public parks and other land patches, which, for a decade, have been beset by nomadic tent-dwellers who make copious and inveterate use of propane tanks, electrical heaters, camp stoves, improvised wiring from hijacked power supplies, and open fires.' Article content Well, don't hold your breath. The CBC has now inquired into the possibility that some members of the Wandering Fire-Bringer class may be testing the Nova Scotia fire ban. Turns out it's made of vapour. The province's Department of Opportunities and Social Development estimates that an estimated 137 rough sleepers are still living in the Nova Scotia woods and 'cannot be convinced' to leave. They've been visited repeatedly by a team of 'outreach workers' who themselves enjoy an exemption from the travel rules. A few of the tent-dwellers, worn down by social-worker nattering, agreed to move on or accept spaces in urban shelters. Most have stayed put as if they'd grown roots. Article content Article content And the state turns out to be helpless, even though one fire may already have been started at an 'encampment.' It seems to be generally agreed that there is no point in fining any of the fairy folk of the forest. The provision in the provincial fire proclamation that allows for $25,000 penalties is reserved exclusively for those who might conceivably have such a sum to cough up. Article content Well, what about the ordinary police powers of arrest and detention? After a fortnight of hearing Nova Scotians insist that the current forest-fire risks are unprecedented, and that the traditional mobility privileges of citizenship must necessarily shrivel into abeyance, I am suddenly assured by a legal-aid lawyer that anyone collared for being unlawfully encamped 'would have to be quickly released, as the offence would not warrant being detained.' Article content This ultra-confident prediction leaves me confused. One struggles to understand, from outside N.S., how forest protection can be so important as to justify a ministerial fiat of extraordinary and unprecedented character — but not so important as to be at all enforced. Article content
