When California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 50 on Tuesday, they set in motion political and possibly legal maneuvers that will ultimately determine whether its overt purpose—increasing Democratic congressional members by five or more seats—becomes reality.
The first consequence is a political scramble among politicians in both parties to determine who will run where in next year’s congressional elections. Ambitious Democrats are lining up to run in the newly gerrymandered districts, some of which have been tailored to favor particular candidates.
The most obvious example is a district that stretches from the heavily Republican northeastern corner of the state to the northern suburbs of San Francisco—seemingly made to order for Mike McGuire, the outgoing president pro tem of the state Senate. In creating that district, Governor Gavin Newsom and the Legislature aim to unseat Republican Doug LaMalfa, who currently represents northeastern California in Congress.
If successful, the plan would shrink Republican districts from nine to four. This means that in some areas, such as inland Southern California, current GOP incumbents would be compelled either to retire or to compete against each other for survival.
Prop. 50’s political impacts hinge on the assumption that the maps ratified by the ballot measure will actually be in effect for next year’s elections. While it’s likely they will be used, there remains a possibility that courts will intervene.
By happenstance, Prop. 50’s pro-Democrat gerrymander and the recent pro-Republican gerrymander in Texas are occurring just as the U.S. Supreme Court weighs a major case involving the federal Voting Rights Act. The outcome could have significant impacts on both.
Passed by Congress in 1965 to bolster the civil rights of minorities—particularly Black people in Southern states—the Voting Rights Act prohibits any voting procedure “which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.”
While the law bars exclusionary voting laws, it has been widely interpreted to require the creation of districts specifically designed to increase chances for racial groups to elect representatives from their communities. California’s independent redistricting commission adopted that interpretation in plans drawn after both the 2010 and 2020 censuses, and the newly gerrymandered districts reflect it as well.
However, this interpretation is currently being challenged before the Supreme Court in a case out of Louisiana. The Court’s conservative majority has indicated in arguments and past rulings that they may consider such race-based districting as discriminatory against white voters.
“This court held that race-based affirmative action in higher education must come to an end,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in his brief in the Louisiana case. He argues that the same principle should apply to using the Voting Rights Act to draw legislative districts that are likely to elect Black or Latino candidates.
Adding to the tension, President Donald Trump’s Justice Department monitored Tuesday’s voting and could contend that California’s new congressional maps are discriminatory and should be suspended until the Supreme Court issues its decision.
Trump seemed to hint at possible intervention in a Truth Social post on Tuesday, denouncing Prop. 50 as a “GIANT SCAM.” He claimed that mailed ballots—the most prominent form of voting—disenfranchise Republicans and are “under very serious legal and criminal review.” He closed his post with the ominous message, “STAY TUNED!”
Looking back, in 2001, the threat of intervention by Republican President George W. Bush’s administration thwarted plans by California’s Legislature for a gerrymander favoring Democrats. This forced lawmakers to make a deal with Republicans on maps that maintained the partisan status quo.
As the 2024 elections approach, all eyes will be on how the political and legal battles over Prop. 50 unfold—and what the future holds for California’s congressional representation.
https://calmatters.org/commentary/2025/11/prop-50-political-maneuvers/
