Shawn Griffiths
President Donald Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom are escalating a partisan tug-of-war match — each threatening to manipulate electoral maps for short-term advantage. However, their proposals are receiving significant pushback from voters, election reform advocates, even members of their own parties.
Trump and Texas: Flood Recovery, Hemp Regulations to Take a Backseat to a Gerrymander?
Earlier this month, Trump called on Texas Republicans to convene a special legislative session to redraw congressional boundaries before the 2026 midterms – a move designed to add approximately 5 new GOP-friendly seats to the party’s razor thin U.S. House majority.
Texas was already slated to have a special session starting on July 21. The priority for Governor Greg Abbott was regulating the state’s hemp industry after he vetoed a bill that would outright ban intoxicating hemp products from store shelves.
Then, after a series of floods devastated Central Texas, lawmakers were expected to tackle flood relief, recovery, and improve early-warning systems to help prevent natural disasters from turning into horrific tragedies.
The floods have claimed the lives of more than 130 people, including at least 36 children, and over 100 people are still believed to be missing.
However, there is a concern across parties that Abbott’s willingness to go along with Trump’s plan to add mid-decade gerrymandering to the legislature’s priorities will pivot from issues that matter right now to voters – especially as it relates to public safety.
Texas House Democrats are contemplating a walkout to block the sessions—though similar efforts in 2021 failed. Democratic Texas Rep. Rafael Anchia of Dallas said he thinks it is a bad idea to “redistrict again and change the election rules just to benefit Trump.”
But there are also many Republicans who are reportedly concerned about the risk to incumbents, the potential for backfire, and heightened legal scrutiny. Legal groups are already preparing lawsuits, contending it's a partisan ploy that marginalizes minority voters.
“The current maps are already blatantly racist and discriminate against voters of color, communities of color, all over the state,” said Anthony Gutierrez, the executive director of Common Cause Texas.
He added: “There would be absolutely no way you get to five more Republican districts without just completely trampling on minority voting rights.”
Newsom Strikes Back with Reciprocal Redistricting Threat – And Gets Slammed By Fellow Democrats
Gov. Newsom, outraged by Republican map‑tampering, has signaled that California might retaliate. On “Pod Save America,” he floated two options:
- Legislative override of the independent commission.
- A special election ballot measure followed by a rushed special session to allow mid‑decade redistricting
He also warned that “If we’re gonna play fair in a world that is wholly unfair… we may have the higher moral ground, but the ground is shifting beneath us,” and added that “two can play this game,” referencing a statement made by Trump.
There is one problem – California uses an independent redistricting commission.
Critics argue a legislative mechanism that allows state lawmakers to change maps drawn by an independent body would undermine the nonpartisan purpose of the commission – effectively sabotaging it for partisan advantage.
The voter-approved independent redistricting commission was structured in 2010 to prevent exactly this kind of political interference.
Newsom’s proposal has drawn heavy criticism from within his own party. Assemblymember Alex Lee, the head of the state Legislature’s Progressive Caucus said, “Trying to save democracy by destroying democracy is dangerous and foolish.”
“By legitimizing the race to the bottom of gerrymandering, Democrats will ultimately lose.”
One Democratic consultant said: “The idea of taking away the power from the citizens and giving it back to the politicians — the optics of that is horrendous and indefensible.” The consultant also said this was “a crazy hill to die on.”
Is This Even About Representation Anymore?
Partisan gerrymandering isn’t new. Whether it is a Republican majority in Texas or a Democratic majority in Maryland, both parties have long used the redistricting process to carve out their states in ways that protect and grow their power.
What Trump and Newsom are proposing is the “nuclear option” to a process that already undermines the democratic process by putting party advantage over meaningful and accountable representation.
It would turn a once-in-a-decade match of tug-of-war into a perpetual game of advantage where no matter which party wins, citizens lose under the partisan mindset: “If you take our districts, we’ll take yours.”
One IVN reader commented on Newsom's proposal, saying:
Both parties prioritize keeping power over the well-being of their constituents, very sad. Independents have an opportunity to replace party rubber stamp candidates with free thinkers in [the] next election.”
Another said in response to Trump’s comments about removing undocumented immigrants from the census count that “changing the census is just an excuse to gerrymander more [sic]. We either need to get rid of gerrymandering or blue states need to join the party.”
One independent commenter said that the only reason gerrymandering is finally getting any media attention is because Trump was talking about it: “Both parties have been doing this for decades but it's getting press coverage because it’s Trump.”
This is a stark reminder: Democracy shouldn’t be treated as a tug‑of‑war. For voters and public policy, the stakes are far too high.
The provocative exchange between Trump and Newsom could be chalked up to nothing more than political theater – but if Texas and California get serious with reciprocal gerrymandering, it will no doubt erode trust even more in a system that has already betrayed voters.