The Texas House passed its proposed congressional redistricting map Wednesday on a final vote of 88 to 52, procedural vote is now underway. Next, the map will head to the Senate for consideration.
The vote followed a fierce debate that stretched over six hours, coming just two days after the chamber reestablished a quorum with the return of Democratic representatives.
State Rep. Todd Hunter (R-Corpus Christi) authored the House bill, but he claimed not to know who drew the map – only that it came from the same law firm, Butler Snow, that advised him as to the map’s legality. He repeatedly pointed to a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Rucho v. Common Cause, which held that partisan gerrymandering in redistricting is beyond the reach of federal courts.
“Redistricting can be at any point in time, and I want everybody to know this.” Hunter said. “You want transparency? Here’s the U.S. Supreme Court legal transparency. The underlying goal of this plan is straightforward: improve Republican political performance.”
Hunter’s transparency didn’t go over well as several Democrats lined up to question him on exactly why the districts were drawn in a manner they say dilutes the votes of minorities.
Lorianne Willett / KUT News
/
KUT News
Outside of the chamber, in the Capitol building rotunda, a protest was taking place. Activists, congressmen and everyday Texans filled the rotunda, at times chanting, giving speeches and constantly holding up a large black and white sign reading, “END GERRYMANDERING SAVE DEMOCRACY.”
Back in the House chamber, Hunter made an argument for the need for a new congressional map. He said that some of the current congressional districts had been drawn as minority coalition-opportunity districts – that is, districts drawn to elect representatives of a coalition of different non-white racial or ethnic groups.
He cited a recent ruling of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Petteway v. Galveston County, to argue that minority coalition districts are not allowed under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That case remains under dispute.
Hunter argued that four out of the five new congressional districts are majority Hispanic. State Rep. Armando Walle (D-Houston) countered that, in splitting up Houston’s Congressional District 29, that district – originally drawn as an Hispanic-opportunity district – would no longer have an Hispanic majority.
“The political performance in 29 stays Democrat,” Hunter said.
Hunter identified five specific congressional districts now held by Democrats as targeted for Republican pickup: Congressional Districts 9 (U.S. Rep. Al Green, Houston), 28 (U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, Laredo), 32 (U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson, Farmers Branch), 34 (U.S. Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, McAllen), and 35 (U.S. Rep. Greg Casar, Austin).
Hunter said he had chosen to update the map following the Democratic quorum break, on his own initiative and in consultation with legal counsel, in order to increase Republican performance.
State Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D-Austin) was one of several Democratic lawmakers who sought to point out that there had not been a single opportunity for the public to weigh in on the map lawmakers were preparing to vote on.
Hunter responded to each such argument by saying the majority Republicans were under no obligation to hold such hearings, although they had held four lengthy public hearings to take testimony during the first special session.
“You’re not going to like this, but for 18 days, things could have happened. You all chose to walk out. To me, you damaged the process. You kept people away. You kept work from being done,” Hunter told House Democrats. “Don’t use that as an excuse to belabor this bill.”
Lorianne Willett / KUT News
/
KUT News
Democrats argue the map is racial gerrymandering, not just partisan
Democrats largely focused their opposition to the map on charges that it is racially discriminatory and that it allows lawmakers to pick their voters rather than the other way around.
State Rep. Chris Turner (D-Grand Prairie) attempted unsuccessfully to attach an amendment that would have struck the bill’s enacting clause, killing it. He argued that Hunter’s claim the bill’s goal was purely partisan gain was disingenuous.
“This bill intentionally discriminates against Black and Hispanic Texans and other Texans of color by cracking and packing minority communities across the state of Texas,” Turner said. “We are in a turning point for our democracy if we allow cheating – and that’s what this is, it’s cheating – elections will no longer reflect the will of the people in a democracy,”
State Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer (D-San Antonio) unsuccessfully sought to attach an amendment requiring the bill to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which forbids racial discrimination in redistricting.
“This seems to be just a debate about red shirts versus blue shirts, and that is not how this process works,” Martinez Fischer said.
Martinez Fischer also unsuccessfully sought to amend the bill so that – if, as expected, the proposed map faces a court challenge – that Texas’ 2021 congressional redistricting map would apply until that court challenge is resolved.
Similarly, state Rep. Harold Dutton (D-Houston) unsuccessfully sought to amend the bill to require an explicit federal court ruling that the redistricting map does not discriminate against Black and Latino voters. Hunter argued against the amendment on the ground that the Supreme Court had struck down the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act.
State Rep. Donna Howard (D-Austin) unsuccessfully sought to amend the bill by barring the map from taking effect until after the state had established an independent redistricting commission.
“Members, what is happening on the floor today is a blatantly obvious attempt to determine the outcome of the upcoming midterm election before a single vote is cast,” Howard said. “HB 4 is a blatant attempt by a handful of elected officials to choose their voters because they are afraid their voters won’t choose them.”
House Minority Leader Gene Wu (D-Houston) unsuccessfully attempted to box Republicans in by proposing an amendment that would attach a trigger to the redistricting plan, allowing it to go forward only with the complete release of the Jeffrey Epstein files by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Speaker of the House Dustin Burrows ruled Wu’s amendment not germane to the bill, following a motion by Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park).
“[President Donald] Trump is in those files, and that’s why he’s fighting to keep them hidden,” Wu said in a statement issued ahead of the House debate. “This amendment forces Republicans to choose between their loyalty to Trump and their obligation to expose sexual predators.”
Ultimately, Democrats proposed 12 amendments, with all of them either being tabled, withdrawn, or ruled not germane to the bill.
Lorianne Willett / KUT News
/
KUT News
The Democratic walkout and its role in the map’s construction
House Democrats had managed to stall passage of the map for more than two weeks by scattering out of state. They drew national attention to the issue, prompting several Democratic-led states – most notably California – to pursue their own redistricting efforts to neutralize the effect of Texas’ move as far as the balance of power in Congress goes.
However, in the Texas House itself, the immediate effect was to push at least one redesigned seat further into the Republican column.
On Monday, following the meeting of the full House, the chamber’s select committee on congressional redistricting rapidly approved a new map designed to flip five congressional seats from Democratic to Republican control in the 2026 midterm elections.
The House map differed from the version it had considered in the first special session – and from the version still being weighed by the Texas Senate – primarily in that it would redraw the Houston-centered Congressional District 9 to include largely rural and conservative Liberty County. That would likely complete the task of shifting TX-9 from a solidly Democratic district to a solidly Republican one.
“At the end of the day one chamber will have to approve the other’s map or they will need to iron it out in conference committee,” said Michael O. Adams, a political science professor at Texas Southern University.
Copyright 2025 KUT 90.5
Great Job Blaise Gainey, Andrew Schneider | Houston Public Media & the Team @ Texas Public Radio Source link for sharing this story.
