Juliette Des Rosiers ‘26
Editor-In-Chief
This summer, at the request of President Donald Trump, the Justice Department sent a letter to Texas legislators granting them the authority to call an emergency legislative session to redraw the state’s districts. Under usual circumstances, Texas districts are drawn by the legislature in the year following the census, with the next redistricting scheduled for 2031. In July, the Texas legislature passed new district maps that are predicted to flip five democratic seats to Republican in the upcoming 2026 midterms.
This is an example of gerrymandering, the practice of drawing electoral districts to benefit a particular political party. Gerrymandering is a rampant problem across the U.S., especially in red states, where urban voters and communities of color have their votes diluted down through the packing and cracking of their districts. Tess Frazer ’26, an Austin native, described her frustration at the redrawing of Texas district maps at an unusual time.
“The map of Texas is already insane, so the fact that they would have the audacity to do that just makes me so angry,” Frazer said. “There are so few Democratic seats already. It’s not as if the Republicans are in the minority in Texas, or have ever been, so the fact that they feel the need to do this is really angering.”
The gain of Republican seats would be advantageous for Trump, as it would cushion the slim Republican majority in Congress and make it easier for the Trump administration to pass laws. In response to Texas’s redistricting, California Governor Gavin Newsom introduced the Election Rigging Response Act to the California legislature, which passed it down to a vote from California constituents.
The act would give the California legislature the jurisdiction to override district maps drawn by California’s independent commission. The new maps would flip an estimated three to five Republican seats to Democrats, aiming to counteract the seats lost in Texas. They would expire in 2030, following the next census, and would be redrawn again by the independent redistricting commission.
On Nov. 4, California held a special election on Proposition 50, colloquially termed Prop 50. Frazer explained that, though she believes gerrymandering as a response to other states’ gerrymandering is a slippery slope, she appreciates the solidarity with Texas Democratic legislators who resisted the redistricting by breaking quorum and leaving the state.
“It really does make the people of Texas and the Democrats of Texas feel powerless,” Frazer said. “So for another state to come in and say, we see you, we see what’s happening, feels important. I just wish it wasn’t going to have an impact in California … It makes it a partisan playing field where the Republicans are doing bad stuff, and now the Democrats are responding by also not doing great stuff that just continues this cycle that doesn’t get us anywhere.”
Early polling showed majority support for Prop 50, with a UC Berkeley poll estimating 60% support and a Public Policy Institute of California poll estimating 56%. The amount of public messaging on the proposition was unparalleled, with endorsements for the campaign from former President Obama and endorsements against from former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. In Claremont, the Claremont Democrats group was the first partisan group other than local candidates allowed to table at the Claremont Farmers Market.
Scripps students who vote in California also engaged in thoughtful dialogue about Prop 50. Annika Gauthier ’26 explained why some Californians seem conflicted about the proposition.
“It is interesting, talking to people from California, the uneasiness that comes with this,” she said. “I feel like people recently have been like, Governor Newsom is a fighter for democracy in California, rah, rah. But I don’t think a lot of Californians actually like Newsom very much. Definitely amongst people I’ve talked to, there’s a lot of hesitation about it and fear that’s [among] people who want to do the right thing, but what do you do when you’re put between a rock and a hard place?”
Maya McClain ’27 explained that she thinks the redistricting is a two-way street and expressed that it’s a reasonable response to Republicans in Texas.
“I do support the proposition,” she said. “Frankly, I think it’s interesting, because there are a lot of people that I’ve talked to about it who I kind of expected to [say we] can’t stoop to that level. But honestly, you kind of have to do what you have to do right now. Texas is gonna do it, then, I guess so are we. It’s not something that I think should be, like, normalized, obviously. I think if California was the first people to do it, to gain five Democratic seats, [and] it wasn’t a response to Texas, it would be kind of like, oh, that’s maybe not what you should be doing.”
Sofia White ’27 expressed that she thinks it is essential to take more direct action against Republican redistricting, despite debates about the ethics of gerrymandering.
“I’m democratic [and] I will always be voting democratic,” she said. “But I think a weakness within the party is definitely purity politics. And people not wanting to push back and rebel against what the right is doing. So I do like Newsom’s approach to fighting fire with fire.”
Geeta Karlcut ’26 echoed this sentiment, commenting that even though they are staunchly against gerrymandering, they believe it is important for Californians to stand up to the redistricting pushed by President Trump for his political gain.
“I don’t think it was moral to do it in the first place, but now that someone else has done it, isn’t it?” they said. “I think in my heart, it’s more moral to cancel it out than to just let it happen, even though I feel like that decision, in and of itself, isn’t the most ethical decision. But I think it’s more ethical in the fact that they’re letting people vote on it rather than just having the governor sign off on it without having people vote.”
Scripps students also discussed how the off-cycle timing of the redistricting caused many California voters to pause.
“I think by the timing of it, you are making your intentions and your motivations very clear,” McClain said. “It’s just more explicit that you’re doing this to get votes or a seat in the House. So I do think that’s certainly problematic. It makes it definitely more controversial and a bigger problem.”
Arguments against the measure point to the deviation from California’s independent commission based on the census as abandoning the integrity of the democratic process.
“I see where people are coming from, because all presidential elections are every four years and there’s term limits for everything, so everything’s kind of on an even year sort of scale,” White said. “But I think for me, I did appreciate that Newsom did pull in an emergency proposition and was acting fast.”
Karlcut also pointed out that the slow-moving judicial process for challenging and overturning redistricting maps placed an impetus on the legislature and the Governor to act.
“It’s bad, but redistricting or gerrymandering on the basis of political party is not illegal,” they said. “Doing things through the court system takes a long time, and then they’re worried about the elections happening next year. They were worried that the courts wouldn’t be able to strike it down in time, if they would strike it down at all. That’s why it’s on the ballots tomorrow. I am against districting on the basis of politics, and I think it should be done by a neutral committee. But I am pro not letting people like very blatantly go against the rules [and] disenfranchise millions of voters.”
When asked if they thought Prop 50 would pass in California and have a meaningful effect on the distribution of seats in Congress following the 2026 midterms, students were tentatively hopeful.
“Recently, we had a new funding bill that passed that dealt with building new houses, and that did pass within all California voters,” said Gauthier. “This is different, but I think it has the same kind of liberal hope behind it that I think a lot of Californian voters kind of lean to, rather than maybe a more nihilistic, somewhat more realistic view of politics. I know speaking amongst like family and friends at home, there is this sense of like, what else can you do? It does set a precedent, but what are you supposed to do in a time that is unprecedented?”
Mere minutes after the polls closed and counting of ballots began, the Associated Press announced that Proposition 50 had passed. As of Nov. 5, over 8 million ballots have been counted in the special, off-year election, and the “Yes” motion won by a 27-point margin.
Photo Courtesy of Juliette Des Rosiers ‘26
