Federal court denies GOP request to block Prop. 50 maps for CA redistricting
California’s new, more liberal congressional districts will go into effect in the June primary midterms after a federal court denied a request from the state Republican Party and the U.S. Department of Justice to block them.
The U.S. District Court for Central California rejected Republicans’ claims that the new maps, which voters passed in November via the Proposition 50 ballot measure, were unconstitutional because they favored a particular race of voters, known as racial gerrymandering.
“We find that Challengers have failed to show that racial gerrymandering occurred, and we conclude that there is no basis for issuing a preliminary injunction,” the court wrote in its decision issued Wednesday.
The three-judge panel was split between Judges Josephine L. Staton and Wesley L. Hsu, respective appointees of former presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who sided with Newsom; and Judge Kenneth K. Lee, an appointee of President Donald Trump who dissented.
The California Republican Party, led by Assemblymember David Tangipa, later joined by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, sued hours after voters overwhelmingly passed Prop. 50 on November 4.
Attorneys for the state GOP argued that that Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had illegally drawn the maps to favor Latinos, who make up the largest voting bloc in the state.
GOP plans appeal to Supreme Court
State GOP chair Corrin Rankin said the party intended to appeal the decision and seek a preliminary injunction with the Supreme Court, citing Lee’s dissent: “The map drawer’s plain statements acknowledging that he racially gerrymandered the Proposition 50 maps, which he and the Legislature refused to explain or deny, in addition to our experts’ testimony, established that the courts should stop the implementation of the Prop. 50 map.”
“We look forward to continuing this fight in the courts,” Rankin said.
The new congressional maps, which were drawn by Sacramento redistricting expert Paul Mitchell, redrew all 52 House seats and shifted more liberal voters into five districts currently held by Republicans, with the aim of flipping those seats in the November midterms.
Hsu and Staton rejected that argument, pointing to media coverage that showed both sides alternatively framing the initiative as a way for Democrats to take control of the House, or for Republicans to maintain their slim congressional majority.
“Proposition 50 was the single issue on the ballot for the November 4 special election: the Official Voter Information Guide provided maps to the voters showing both the existing district lines and the proposed new district lines. And the pros and cons of Proposition 50 were outlined in purely political, partisan terms, with each side claiming the other was engaging in a ‘power grab,’” the court decision read. “No one told the voters that the Proposition 50 Map involved racial gerrymandering.”
In June, President Donald Trump began pressing Republican states to redraw their congressional districts to shore up the GOP’s House majority, which rarely occurs outside of Census counts. Newsom called upon California lawmakers to do the same, launching an effort that became one of the most expensive races in state history and solidified his position as a Democratic Party leader.
“Republicans’ weak attempt to silence voters failed,” Newsom said after the ruling.
“California voters overwhelmingly supported Prop 50 — to respond to Trump’s rigging in Texas — and that is exactly what this court concluded.”
This story was originally published January 14, 2026 at 1:38 PM.
