LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA – California’s new congressional map, crafted to help Democrats gain House seats, will face a federal court challenge Monday as judges consider whether the voter-approved district boundaries can be used in upcoming elections. The hearing in Los Angeles marks the start of a contentious legal and political battle between the Trump administration and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is weighing a 2028 presidential run. The lawsuit seeks a temporary restraining order by Dec. 19, the first day candidates can officially file to run in the 2026 election.
Voters passed Proposition 50 in November, approving a new U.S. House map intended to flip up to five congressional seats to Democrats in next year’s midterms. The map was drawn partly in response to Republican-led efforts in Texas backed by former President Donald Trump. The redistricting battle has drawn national attention, with other states like Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio adopting district lines that may favor one party. The Supreme Court recently allowed Texas to use its new map for 2026, while the Justice Department has now targeted California.
The U.S. Justice Department, joining a lawsuit filed by the California Republican Party, alleges the state gerrymandered its map in violation of the Constitution by using race to favor Hispanic voters. Republicans want the court to block the use of the map, which was approved for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections. State Democrats remain confident the challenge will fail.
“In letting Texas use its gerrymandered maps, the Supreme Court noted that California’s maps, like Texas’s, were drawn for lawful reasons,” Newsom’s spokesperson Brandon Richards said. “That should be the beginning and the end of this Republican effort to silence the voters of California.”
New congressional maps are typically drawn every 10 years following the Census. California relies on an independent commission, while states like Texas allow politicians to draw the maps. Mid-decade map changes like California’s are rare. Paul Mitchell, a Democratic redistricting consultant who helped design the new map, is expected to testify. The Justice Department claims Mitchell and state leaders admitted that some districts were redrawn to create Latino majorities.
The lawsuit cites state Democratic statements highlighting that the map “retains and expands Voting Rights Act districts that empower Latino voters” while leaving Black-majority districts in Oakland and Los Angeles unchanged. Federal law requires districts to be drawn to ensure minority groups have political representation, but the suit argues Proposition 50 used race to advance political interests rather than comply with the law. Studies from Cal Poly Pomona and Caltech cited in the lawsuit suggest the map would increase Latino voting influence.
House Democrats need only a few additional seats next year to take control of the chamber, potentially threatening Trump’s remaining agenda and opening congressional investigations into his administration. Currently, Republicans hold 219 seats to Democrats’ 214.