The redistricting war has changed. Here’s where the battle lines of Congress have moved.

In addition to lifting Democrats’ spirits, last week’s elections, in which the party beat expectations and regained much of the support among young and nonwhite voters that it had lost in 2024, changed the calculus for what may become one of the defining fights of the second Trump presidency: the so-called redistricting war.

What is this war about? It’s a fight over determining whether, when, and how state lawmakers can redraw the districts that determine which party wins a seat in the House of Representatives — and thus influence the overall balance of power in the lower house of Congress.

The stakes are high. Republicans face headwinds in holding onto control of the House next year, and reanimated Democratic voters could deliver a 2018-style wave by winning the national popular vote. But Republican redraws could foil that, and with that, spoil the chance that Democrats finally get a check on Trump’s power.

How is redistricting supposed to work?

Traditionally, congressional maps are set by states every 10 years, after the US Census finishes its count of the American population. Every decade, therefore, district maps, designed by either state legislatures or independent commissions, are supposed to be updated to:

Over the last few decades, political “gerrymandering” — the selective drawing of districts to benefit one party over another — has been slowly but steadily increasing. It was in 2025, though, that the intensity of this process got kicked up to a whole new level.

The chief reason for this, unsurprisingly, is the commander-in-chief: beginning in July, President Donald Trump began urging Republican-run states to redraw their maps early — before next year’s midterm elections — to give Republicans a boost ahead of 2026. His demands had focused on Texas and Ohio, but similar efforts have been made in Missouri and North Carolina, too.

Democrats, meanwhile, have been slower to respond — in part, no doubt, because their traditional stance on gerrymandering has been to oppose it outright, rather than try to beat Republicans at their own game — but, in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling that made installing “fair maps” even more politically difficult than it was already, and in response to Trump and the Republicans’ escalations, they, too, are now engaging in this political arms race.

And yet, Democrats, who have long been the champions of independent redistricting and anti-gerrymandering and corruption reforms, argue that the Trump era is forcing them to break these norms too. In California, for example, Gov. Gavin Newsom framed his side’s U-turn on gerrymandering as a necessity. “California has walked the walk on independent redistricting at the state level for 15 years. But we cannot unilaterally disarm while other states throw out the rules to gain power,” he said in August, as Texas continued its efforts and he advanced a referendum in California to counter. “With one vote, Californians can punch back and also demand nationwide independent redistricting.” His side ended up winning that vote by more than 2 million votes.

Where things stand right now

Republicans stand to gain at least 3 seats

Last Tuesday, voters in California approved, by a stunning 30-point margin, a ballot measure to temporarily redraw districts in the state to make five Republican-held seats more favorable to the Democrats next year. Anticipating an anti-Trump electorate more favorable to Democrats, that would mean up to five GOP-held seats would likely flip to the Democrats in the state. The measure was a response led by California Gov. Gavin Newsom to neutralize the advantage Republicans in Texas sought to gain by redrawing their state’s congressional maps this summer.

Back in August, the Texas GOP, under pressure from President Donald Trump, completed its redraw of the state’s maps. It would rejigger the boundaries of Hispanic-heavy, Democratic seats along the Mexico-US border to be more Republican friendly (assuming Hispanics here are getting more Republican), and dilute the power of Democratic voters in the Dallas, Austin, and Houston metro areas.

Meanwhile, in North Carolina and Missouri, Republicans sought to squeeze out one more GOP-friendly seat each by diluting Democratic votes. In North Carolina, they did that by diluting Black voters’ power in the eastern part of the state by adding conservative-leaning coastal counties to a district. And in Missouri, Republicans, at Trump’s behest, split Kansas City’s Democratic voters between two districts, making one more Democratic and the other more Republican.

And in Ohio, Democrats and Republicans reached a compromise to slightly redraw the state’s maps in late October. The result is not as bad for Democrats as it could’ve been: it makes two Democratic seats more Republican friendly, though the Democratic incumbents have won tough races before.

Democrats plan to neutralize GOP gains

Democrats are now responding more aggressively, raising lawsuits to force redraws in Utah and pushing forward with efforts to redraw maps in more states.

The White House has been pressing Indiana Republicans to add one more seat to their 7-2 advantage, sending Vice President JD Vance and top aides to the state to pressure the Republican governor and lawmakers to use a special session to redraw their maps. They plan to take up the issue in December, but it doesn’t seem like the political will is there among GOP lawmakers, per recent local reporting.

Utah’s maps are also the subject of a lawsuit right now, with a decision by Nov. 10 that may determine whether two GOP seats become more competitive for Democrats or Democrats gain one safe seat. A similar style of lawsuit is picking up steam in New York, where the fate of one Republican-held district is in question.

But the biggest, and most likely Democratic move coming up was a bit of a surprise: Virginia Democrats said last month that they were considering plans to redraw the state’s map to make three Republican held seats much more favorable to Democrats. That energy was only boosted with the landslide wins Democrats achieved during last week’s elections, giving them a large majority to be able to pass new maps in the next state legislature. Some state Democrats, however, wants to go even further: to a maximum of four new Democratic seats. That is theoretically possible, but politically an open question.

Both parties are assessing moves in these states:

The road ahead is still wide open in a handful of other states: Maryland is just now beginning the first step in potential redistricting, with the state’s Democratic governor inaugurating a commission last week that would potentially redraw the state’s one Republican-held seat in the deep-blue state. Illinois Democrats are also considering redistricting, though the state is already heavily gerrymandered in Democrats’ favor.

Republicans, meanwhile, are talking about shoring up seats in Nebraska to prevent one toss-up seat that Democrats are targeting next year from flipping, and redrawing districts in Florida and Kansas. The Kansas effort to gain one more seat is on ice until January, but it seems more likely than not to pass when the state legislature convenes then. The Florida effort is more theoretical. Republicans could gain at least two more seats if they redraw districts there, though aside from forming a legislative committee, no other steps have been taken.