California Supreme Court again rejects Republicans’ efforts to stop mid-cycle redistricting

The California Supreme Court has once again rejected a lawsuit brought by Republican legislators seeking to squash Democrats’ attempt to redraw the state’s congressional maps ahead of next year’s midterm elections.

The court denied the petition on Wednesday, Aug. 27 — just two days after GOP members of the state legislature asked it to block Proposition 50, a mid-decade congressional redistricting measure, from appearing on the Nov. 4 ballot. Republicans argued that the planned special election violates the state Constitution and would compromise voter representation.

House Republicans expand antisemitism investigation to UCSF, UCLA

Congressman Sam Liccardo unveils partnership to bolster wildfire resistance in West Valley

California Republicans mount another legal challenge to mid-cycle redistricting

What’s next for California redistricting? An expensive election

Rep. Sam Liccardo wants to help Democrats take back the House in 2026

State Sens. Tony Strickland, R-Huntington Beach, and Suzette Martinez Valladares, R-Santa Clarita, along with Assemblymembers Tri Ta, R-Westminster, and Kate Sanchez, R-Rancho Santa Margarita, were petitioners in the lawsuit.

In a joint statement following the court’s decision, the group said: “The Supreme Court’s abdication of its responsibility to be a checks and balance on the other branches of the government, let alone deny the opportunity to even hear the arguments being made, undermines voter confidence and sets a terrifying precedent that the governor and a willing legislature can blatantly disregard and violate the constitution at will, without the fear of any accountability or punishment.”

“We are watching in real time the destruction of law-and-order, and of our republic at the hands of a Democratic governor, Democratic super-majority legislature and Supreme Court,” they added.

The group called it a “sad preview” of things to come should Prop. 50, which Gov. Gavin Newsom and his Democratic allies are pushing, pass.

The same court had rejected a similar petition that Republicans filed last week, asking a judge to intervene and halt Democrats’ attempt to enact new, partisan congressional maps in California for the next three elections.

At the time, the court’s order said the petitioners — who submitted their filing before the legislature actually voted to place Prop 50 on the ballot — “failed to meet their burden of establishing a basis for relief at this time” under the state’s constitution.

Republicans had hoped that filing another petition this week, after a special election had officially been called, would yield a different result.

Beyond the timing issue, Mike Columbo, an attorney for the petitioners, said this week that Prop. 50 illegally lumps two issues into one measure — first by asking voters if they think California should petition Congress to pass independent redistricting nationwide, then asking voters to sign off on the recently proposed partisan congressional maps for California.

Forcing voters to vote either “yes” or “no” on both questions simultaneously violates a rule known as the “single subject rule,” Columbo said.

Newsom’s spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Wednesday’s court ruling.

But an X account for the governor celebrated Wednesday’s court decision, saying, “Keep em coming, (CAGOP). We’ll keep winning.”

Democrats have said the partisan congressional maps they’re proposing would counter similar gerrymandering efforts in Texas. They said they are only going this path to “neutralize” similar attempts in red states to help President Donald Trump retain GOP control of the U.S. House of Representatives following the 2026 midterm elections.

Prop. 50 will ask voters, who have final say, if they want the gerrymandered maps to be used for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 House races. Following the 2030 election, the state would revert to having a nonpartisan independent commission draw future maps, as is the current practice.

But Columbo said by proposing the gerrymandered maps and engaging in the redistricting process before voters actually granted lawmakers authority to do so, “the legislature exceeded its power under the Constitution.”

Columbo is with the Dhillon Law Group. That firm was founded by Harmeet Dhillon, who leads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in the Trump administration.

Meanwhile, Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher on Wednesday floated the idea — however unlikely — of splitting California into two states. His idea, a response to the redistricting efforts, is to have the Golden State’s 35 more rural or conservative inland counties break away from its generally more liberal coastal communities.