A leading Democratic strategist and a GOP Attorney join Y’all-itics to react to the ruling and explain possible next steps.
DALLAS — The ruling may have come from a three-judge panel in El Paso, Texas. But it is still reverberating across the entire country.
In a two-to-one decision, the panel struck down the congressional map lawmakers passed over the summer in an attempt to give Republicans five additional seats in the U.S. House.
In the majority opinion, Judge Jeffrey Brown, appointed by President Donald Trump, wrote “substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 map.” A judge appointed by President Obama agreed and Texas, for the time being, reverts back to the 2021 congressional map.
But in a scathing dissent, Judge Jerry Smith, a President Reagan appointee, called the ruling perverse and bizarre, saying: “This is the most blatant exercise of judicial activism that I have ever witnessed.”
Attorney General Ken Paxton immediately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. And legal experts and lawmakers expect the high court to intervene. That could include reinstating the 2025 map while it takes up the case.
Matt Angle is a Democratic strategist and executive director of the Lone Star Project, which helps Democrats get elected in Texas.
While the ruling is exactly what Democrats hoped for, Angle says it’s far too early to count any chickens and he’s not so sure that a conservative Supreme Court will side with them.
“The facts are overwhelming here that what Abbott and the Republicans did under this map was systematically undermine minorities, and they said they were going to do it. They promoted racial discrimination as a reason for doing it. And the court called them on it,” Angle argued. “And so, it would mean that the Supreme Court would really be denying the facts of the case. And it would be a very, very political decision. But we’ve seen some political decisions, so we’re worried about it.”
On the other side, Eric Opiela is a well-known Republican attorney in Texas, with experience before the U.S. Supreme Court.
He says the public would normally see dissenting opinions issued at the same time as the majority opinion. But in this case, Judge Smith’s dissent was released one day later.
“I’ve never seen something like this in an opinion before. I think a lot of people are saying that. I think it’s a signal to the Supreme Court that not all is well in Denmark with regards to the majority opinion. I think that’s probably why he included it,” Opiela told us on Y’all-itics.
Opiela told us to expect to hear some of the same language and arguments from the dissent in Paxton’s appeal.
During the 2011 redistricting fight in Texas, Opiela represented Republicans in the Texas Congressional Caucus and made oral arguments before the high court.
Based on his experience, Opiela said he does not think the primaries will be delayed next year because of this battle. He says the filing period could be extended a couple of days, but otherwise, the 2026 election remains on track.
But Opiela does think the U.S. Supreme Court will take the case, and he suspects a stay will be issued, which means the new 2025 congressional maps would be used during the 2026 election. And he thinks the primary reason for the stay will be the Purcell principle, which states that courts shouldn’t change election law too close to an election.
“So, we’ve already had filing that occurred. We had candidates that have been filing for over a week now. We have counties that redrew their precincts. We have sheer chaos that is out there right now as a result of the majority opinion,” Opiela explained. “It’s almost definite that we’re going to get a stay of this just because of the Purcell principle and that’s a Supreme Court doctrine that says we don’t interfere with ongoing elections.”
The funny thing about the Purcell principle, though, is that both parties say it applies to them.
Using the same doctrine, Democrats argue the best way forward is to hold the 2026 election under the old map.
“It’s certainly better for the process, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, better for the process is we go forward with the three judge panel’s decisions. They had a full hearing. They heard from both sides. They made a ruling. They’ve ordered that the 2025 map be set aside and the 2021 map be run on. That’s the thing that would cause the least disruption,” argued Angle, the Democratic strategist.
While a stay may be issued quickly, don’t expect a final ruling for quite some time, as Opiela says the Justices won’t take up the case during the current term.
“The docket is full,” he said. “I think that decision would be ready in time for the 2028 elections.”