Texas congressional candidate arrested during heated redistricting hearing
'It is a shame,' Martin yelled as he was escorted out. 'You should all be ashamed.'
Texas Republicans are pushing to redraw the state's maps after pressure from the Trump administration. They have not yet released a proposed map, which could re-define congressional districts to give the GOP a leg up in the 2026 midterms.
Martin, a Democrat, was speaking in opposition to the redistricting efforts, which he called 'illegal gerrymandering,' when he went over his two-minute time limit. State Rep. Cody Vasut (R), who chaired the hearing, asked the sergeant-at-arms to remove Martin.
The candidate's brother said Friday that the charges against Martin had been dropped and that he would be freed from custody later that night. Martin faced charges for disrupting the meeting, trespassing and resisting arrest, local media reported.
Martin is running in a November special election for the seat vacated after Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-Texas) died in March.
The seat had been previously held by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), who also died in office. Martin was formerly a top aide to the congresswoman and has been endorsed by her daughter, who chairs his campaign.
In a post on the social media platform X prior to the hearing, Martin said Democrats could retaliate against the GOP's redistricting by making their own moves to redraw the maps.
'Blue states will now RUTHLESSLY gerrymander out Republicans to counteract this insanity,' he wrote. 'If rules are good for Republicans, they're good for us!'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
12 minutes ago
- USA Today
Supreme Court could end race-based voting districts. Good. They're antiquated.
Considering race inherently means discrimination in the sense that you believe skin color is an important factor in vote choice. A redistricting war between red and blue states has erupted in response to Texas' new proposed map, prompting Democrats nationwide to go on the offensive. This isn't the only reason redistricting is making headlines. The Supreme Court has indicated that it will be considering whether race-based districts are constitutional next term. The colorblind approach taken by the conservative justices on many other issues, such as college admissions and employment discrimination, indicates that they may be skeptical of race-based districting as well. The Supreme Court should strike down racial considerations in the districting process. Many states have interpreted the Voting Rights Act to mandate the creation of a specific number of majority-minority districts, which is in tension with the Supreme Court's precedents on the matter. It's unconstitutional to consider race when creating district maps In this case, Louisiana has adopted a new districting map, adding a second majority-Black district to the state. The state is being accused of violating the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court has ordered briefing on, as the order phrased it, 'Whether the State's intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution.' Navigating race in the districting process poses a unique challenge. States cannot create districts based solely on race, for fear of violating the equal protection clause, but they also fear that they will run afoul of the Voting Rights Act if they take a colorblind approach. However, the Supreme Court may rule that all race-based considerations in districting are unconstitutional, alleviating the burden on states to navigate the narrow space left by these two forces. They would be justified in doing so. Opinion: I'm a Democrat who left Texas. New GOP maps will silence Latino voters. The Supreme Court has made it clear in recent cases that they are skeptical of any policy dealing with group characteristics rather than individuals. Justice Clarence Thomas has called the practice of race-based redistricting in response to general past discrimination 'utterly divorced from the sort of 'specific, identified instances of past discrimination' that this Court demands to justify a race-based remedy. Nor is a race-conscious approach reflective of modern times, compared with those at the time of the Voting Rights Act's passage in 1965. Multiple Supreme Court justices have lamented race-based remedial solutions that have no end point. Some have suggested that race-conscious practices can be employed to address specific injustices in their aftermath, but that such programs must have an end point. Six decades later, proponents of race-based considerations in the districting process would have these guidelines in place for eternity. It's understandable why explicit mandates based on race might have been a necessary evil in the 1960s, but the systematic discrimination that spurred the need for such requirements is now long in the past. Race-based districting makes no sense In Louisiana v. Callais, in particular, the facts are particularly egregious. In a desperate quest to create an additional majority minority district, Louisiana has created a monstrosity of a district, stretching across the majority of the state's width and height in order to group together as many Black people as possible. Situations like these demonstrate how overemphasis on race can lead to the neglect of other factors vital to districting, such as compactness and continuity. Opinion: Do you think the Supreme Court is partisan? Well you're wrong. Race should not prevail over other important considerations. A cluster of neighboring counties with similar regional struggles has more in common than two majority-Black cities on opposite sides of a state. Considering race inherently means discrimination in the sense that you believe skin color is an important factor in vote choice. It should go without saying, but explicit attempts to minimize the impact of minority voters in elections also run afoul of these principles as well. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Race isn't any more important in districting considerations than any other characteristic that correlates with voting patterns. Districting based on race makes little more sense than grouping together people of a certain income level, education level, age range or any other group that can be thought of as having some form of collective interests. The assumption that minority groups themselves are a cohesive voting unit is one rooted in past trends, but in a misunderstanding of where the end point of racial progress ought to be. The goal of districting with regard to race is not that each racial group has its own unique form of representation; rather, it is that race, in the end, is no longer a meaningful differentiation in voting patterns. It is inevitably prejudiced to assume that race is a valuable determining factor in vote choice. There is little reason to believe that a White person put into the exact same upbringing as someone from any specific minority group would have any different voting tendencies. Race may correlate with vote patterns, but it tells you absolutely nothing valuable about an individual. Even if grouping individuals based on race is intended to achieve equal representation, it may run afoul of equal protection. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
Newsweek
13 minutes ago
- Newsweek
What Supreme Court Justices Said About Gerrymandering
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Supreme Court's 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause is facing renewed scrutiny amid a political standoff in Texas, where Democrats have fled the state to block Republican-backed redistricting maps. Critics argue that the ruling, which bars federal courts from reviewing partisan gerrymandering claims, has emboldened aggressive map-drawing that diminishes minority representation. Why It Matters The ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause removed federal courts as a check on partisan gerrymandering, leaving disputes to state courts and legislatures. In states such as Texas, where one party controls the map-drawing process, this can significantly shape election outcomes, potentially diluting minority voting power and limiting fair representation in Congress. The current standoff highlights how the decision has emboldened partisan redistricting strategies, raising broader concerns about the balance of power in American democracy. What To Know The Supreme Court's Role In Rucho, the court ruled 5-4 along ideological lines that federal courts lacked jurisdiction to hear claims of partisan gerrymandering. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, concluded that "such claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts," arguing that there is no constitutional standard to judge them. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh joined the opinion. In a sharp dissent, Justice Elena Kagan warned that the court's refusal to intervene would imperil the foundations of democracy. Joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, Kagan wrote: "Of all times to abandon the Court's duty to declare the law, this was not the one." Kagan argued that the court's withdrawal from redistricting disputes allowed lawmakers to choose their voters instead of the other way around. The ruling left redistricting battles to state courts and legislatures. While Roberts acknowledged that extreme gerrymandering was "incompatible with democratic principles," he maintained that political remedies, rather than federal judicial intervention, were the proper response. The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on June 27, 2023. The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on June 27, Is Gerrymandering? Gerrymandering occurs when political leaders manipulate voting district boundaries to benefit their party. Here's how it works: Imagine your neighborhood is evenly split between two political parties. Instead of drawing fair, competitive districts, lawmakers can manipulate boundaries so one party's voters are grouped together ("packing") or split apart across multiple districts ("cracking"). This makes it much harder for the other party to win seats—even if they receive as many overall votes. For everyday people, this means your vote might not count as much as it should. A community could be divided in a way that weakens its political voice, leaving voters with leaders who don't reflect their priorities on issues such as education, health care or taxes. In the long run, it can lock in one party's power for years, reducing accountability and limiting real choice at the ballot box. Recent Reaction in Texas On Tuesday, Texas Governor Greg Abbott petitioned the state Supreme Court to remove Houston Representative Gene Wu from office, citing the Democrat's role in leading fellow lawmakers in a quorum-breaking protest over redistricting. Abbott said in a news release about the petition, "There must be consequences." Wu and dozens of Democrats left for Illinois on Sunday to block a vote on a GOP-backed congressional map that seeks to strengthen Republican control in Washington, arguing that without federal oversight, partisan map-drawing could undermine fair representation for Black and Latino voters. What People Are Saying Texas Governor Greg Abbott, addressing lawmakers who fled the state, said: "I made clear in a formal statement on Sunday, August 3, that if the Texas House Democrats were not in attendance when the House reconvened at 3 p.m. on Monday, August 4, then action would be taken to seek their removal. They have not returned and have not met the quorum requirements. "Representative Wu and the other Texas House Democrats have shown a willful refusal to return, and their absence for an indefinite period of time deprives the House of the quorum needed to meet and conduct business on behalf of Texans." State Representative Gene Wu, the House Democratic Caucus chair, said in a statement: "Denying the governor a quorum was not an abandonment of my office; it was a fulfillment of my oath. Unable to defend his corrupt agenda on its merits, Greg Abbott now desperately seeks to silence my dissent by removing a duly-elected official from office." He added: "History will judge this moment." Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin warned on Tuesday that if Abbott succeeded: "We do not have a democracy anymore. … And if the state of Texas has any law left in it, the Court will immediately dismiss this farce." What Happens Next With federal courts barred from hearing partisan gerrymandering claims, any legal challenges to Texas' redistricting maps are expected to play out in state courts. While plaintiffs may invoke state constitutional protections or the federal Voting Rights Act, voting rights advocates warn that without federal oversight, states could pursue increasingly aggressive gerrymandering strategies. As Texas moves forward with its redistricting plans, the Rucho decision and the ideological divide it revealed continue to shape the national conversation about voting rights, representation and the role of the judiciary in protecting democratic norms.
Politico
20 minutes ago
- Politico
Rescissions 2.0 gets a frosty GOP reception
IN TODAY'S EDITION:— How rescissions could risk a shutdown— Mike Johnson has a Cory Mills problem— A conservative group's pitch for megabill 2.0 Passing the first package of spending clawbacks in July was an excruciating exercise for the Senate. Now some Republicans are signaling they don't want to go through it again — especially with a shutdown cliff looming. 'Another rescissions package at this point in time or in the future ... really makes any kind of bipartisan effort on any legislation, including appropriations, much more difficult,' Sen. Jerry Moran told Calen. Senators struck a deal before recess to pass their first three spending bills. If the chamber's Republicans want to stay on a bipartisan glide path — and gain leverage in broader spending talks with the House and President Donald Trump — they'll likely need to refrain from cutting any more previously approved funding. 'It takes 60 votes to pass bills, and rescissions really would just damage our relationship to work together,' Moran added. A White House official tells Inside Congress that further rescissions are 'under active discussion' but did not provide further details. Sen. Mike Rounds told reporters Tuesday he'd like to see any rescissions being recommended by the administration 'come back to the Appropriations Committee so we can incorporate that into the process.' 'Things would work better, and if they were truly items where it was waste, fraud and abuse, I would love to put Democrats on record and have them vote against [those items],' Rounds said. 'At the same time, if it's not going to be identifiable that way, then maybe there's a reason why we voted for that funding in the first place.' Plenty of Republicans, however, don't think another rescissions package will land before October. 'I can't imagine laying down a rescissions bill with all the oxygen that it sucks out of the room when we've got to get year-end appropriations done,' Sen. Thom Tillis told Calen. Unfortunately for them, White House budget director Russ Vought is considering using 'pocket rescissions' — a maneuver that would allow the administration to make permanent cuts to federal spending without congressional approval — as soon as this month. The Government Accountability Office and Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins have called the move illegal. GOOD THURSDAY MORNING. RIP to the Rayburn Reuben. Gone but never forgotten. Email us: crazor@ mmccarthy@ and bguggenheim@ THE LEADERSHIP SUITE Mike Johnson's Cory Mills problem GOP leaders have yet to fully engage with the new accusations against Rep. Cory Mills, this time for threatening to release nude photos of his ex-girlfriend, write Hailey Fuchs, Gary Fineout and Meredith Lee Hill. But some Hill Republicans are privately questioning whether they should start looking for another Republican to back in Mills' district, three Republicans with knowledge of the discussions said. 'What if he is arrested for real?' one GOP lawmaker said. Another Republican lawmaker called the recent accusations 'disturbing.' But the latest allegations — on top of a previous assault claim and a pending probe into Mills' business dealings — have not visibly fazed House GOP leaders. A spokesperson for Speaker Mike Johnson did not return a request for comment. Anthony Sabatini, Mills' former 2022 primary challenger who's also the lawyer representing Mills' ex-girlfriend Lindsey Langston, told POLITICO that a House Ethics complaint is coming. Mills has denied the allegations. Schumer pans Trump agenda throughout New York Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer traveled across upstate New York this week to blast the administration's policies as 'raising costs, decimating health care and hurting families' and detail how Democrats are fighting back. Schumer talked to constituents in Medina, Niagara Falls, Auburn and Binghamton. He's planning more stops in New York throughout this week, including a visit to the Buffalo Bills NFL training camp this morning. Schumer is also leading a group of Senate Democrats in requesting a detailed analysis from the Georgetown Center on Health Insurance Reforms on how GOP cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act will impact health insurance plans, plus how Americans should prepare for rate changes indicated by their insurers. POLICY RUNDOWN RSC MULLS A CONSERVATIVE MEGABILL 2.0 PITCH — House GOP staffers had mixed feelings after hearing a conservative think tank's pitch during a Republican Study Committee briefing Wednesday about policies to include in a second budget reconciliation bill. The Economic Policy Innovation Center presented proposals to 'reform federal bureaucrats' compensation,' 'end public service loan forgiveness' and 'prohibit taxpayer money for 'gender transitions',' according to a two-pager distributed at the standing-room-only event and viewed by Benjamin. The RSC wants to develop and then outline its priorities before party leaders officially decide whether to proceed with another party-line bill, according to a person granted anonymity to speak about the private meeting. But there's 'not much chance this gets off the ground,' said another staffer of EPIC's hard-line proposals. An EPIC proposal to extend the bill's one-year moratorium on Medicaid for large abortion providers in particular rubbed a representative from at least one congressional office the wrong way Wednesday. And it's sure to upset GOP moderates if RSC endorses the agenda. The RSC, chaired by Rep. August Pfluger of Texas, plans to have another event for staff this morning as part of its 'Reconciliation 2.0' briefing series. This one will focus on the basics of the Byrd bath — the process by which the Senate parliamentarian determines which policies qualify for inclusion in the filibuster-skirting reconciliation process. Aides will hear from Sam Crofts, the policy director for Senate Energy and Natural Resources, and Jacey Albaugh, an ENR professional staff member, according to an invite sent Wednesday. SENATORS UNVEIL BIPARTISAN BILLS ON SBA LOANS — Sens. Todd Young and Amy Klobuchar rolled out a pair of measures Wednesday that would increase oversight of the popular 504 lending program and make it easier for small manufacturers to access these loans, Katherine Hapgood reports. 504 loans provide long-term, fixed-rate financing for major assets like buildings and land. The program has proven particularly vital for financing businesses in places like Indiana, Young's home state, the Republican said in a statement. Similar bills to improve access to capital and strengthen oversight advanced through Senate Small Business in the previous Congress but failed to get through the House. A spokesperson for Young said the office is hoping the bills get taken up in an upcoming markup when lawmakers return from August recess. Best of POLITICO Pro and E&E: THE BEST OF THE REST Republican Rep. Don Bacon criticizes firing of labor statistics chief, from Kadia Goba at The Washington Post Meet the Republican Senate candidate in Kentucky who could be the next JD Vance, from Henry J. Gomez at NBC News THE CARRYOUT Welcome back to your Inside Congress hosts' favorite recess activity: sharing lawmakers' Capitol Hill food recommendations. Sen. Tim Kaine said his go-to lunch on the Hill is a Senate Carryout grilled cheese with the soup of the day. 'Whatever it is,' Kaine said. 'It could be tomato; it could be chicken noodle soup.' What's your favorite lunch rec or hidden food gem on or around the Hill? Email us: mmccarthy@ and crazor@ CAMPAIGN STOP TENNESSEE SENATE SCRAMBLE — Reps. Andy Ogles, Tim Burchett, Chuck Fleischmann and Diana Harshbarger are in the mix of potential candidates to run for Sen. Marsha Blackburn's seat after she announced her gubernatorial bid Wednesday, Meredith and Jordain Carney report. The seat would become vacant only if Blackburn wins — and she would have the opportunity to name her immediate replacement ahead of a 2028 special election. TUNNEL TALK TAKANO DEMANDS LIBRARY OVERSIGHT — Rep. Mark Takano is pushing for answers after the Library of Congress blamed a 'coding error' for removing parts of the Constitution from an official website, Nicholas Wu writes in. Democrats have raised concerns about the temporary deletion of the sections relating to Congress' powers and the writ of habeas corpus. 'While the Constitution cannot be altered by simply editing a webpage, this change opens the floodgates of misinformation,' he wrote in a letter Wednesday to acting Librarian of Congress Robert Newlen. JOB BOARD Alexander Gonzalez has been promoted to deputy legislative director for Blackburn. Luisa Sanchez is now press secretary and digital manager for Rep. Lori Trahan. She most recently was digital director for Rep. Josh Gottheimer. Paula Huff is now deputy director of scheduling in the office of the secretary at the Department of Labor. She most recently was director of operations for Rep. Tom Kean Jr. Joshua Prewitt is now an assistant in the management office at the White House. He most recently was an administrative assistant in the Senate. Keith Nagy will be comms director for Rep. Zoe Lofgren. He most recently was deputy comms director for Rep. Jared Moskowitz. HAPPY BIRTHDAY Abigail Spanberger … Reps. Chip Roy and Mary Miller … NYT's Jonathan Swan (4-0) … Larry Sabato of the Center for Politics … Ron Christie … Andrew Gradison … Matt Mazonkey of Airbus … Jordan Heiliczer of the National Restaurant Association … Juven Jacob of Juven Capitol Strategies … Kimberly Ellis of Monument Advocacy … Caitlin Legacki … Ryan Callanan … Tamika Mason of Rep. Jim Clyburn's office … Tom McClusky … Ryan Pettit TRIVIA WEDNESDAY'S ANSWER: Eduardo Rodriguez correctly answered that Rep. Lloyd Doggett participated in a successful quorum break in the Texas state house in 1979. TODAY'S QUESTION, from Mia: What was the first overnight session in the Senate, and what bill was being debated? The first person to correctly guess gets a mention in the next edition of Inside Congress. Send your answers to insidecongress@ CORRECTION: Yesterday's edition listed Pat Reap's previous employer; he's now at Newsmax.
