-
The high court left intact a key provision of the federal Voting Rights Act in a case many feared would go the other way. The decision’s importance in ongoing litigation over Texas’ political maps will largely be felt in what didn’t happen.
-
The court said Alabama’s maps denied Black voters the ability to select candidates of their choice, as specified in a section of the Voting Rights Act.
-
The Texas Legislature is required to approve changes to political boundaries during the first regular session after census data is released. But the coronavirus pandemic led lawmakers to pass their latest maps in the offseason.
-
The state's highest court reversed a lower court decision that found the Republican-led Kansas Legislature drew a map that was racially and politically gerrymandered.
-
A map drawn by legislative Republicans was thrown out by a lower court on grounds that it discriminated against people of color and Democrats.
-
As Texas defends against accusations that its new political maps are discriminatory, it’s laying the groundwork to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out longstanding Voting Rights Act protections.
-
The state is heading toward a landmark ruling, regardless of which side the courts take.
-
Attorneys for the Mexican American Legislative Caucus took their latest challenge to Texas’s new political maps to the state’s high court. They argue lawmakers violated the Texas Constitution when drawing state house districts in the Rio Grande Valley.
-
The census defines a prisoner’s home address as the prison they are held at, but there is some effort to change that.
-
The Kansas House gave first-round approval to the congressional map Tuesday. It already passed the Senate, and final House approval Wednesday would send it to the governor's desk. Republicans say it accounts for population shifts. Democrats say it's intended to cost U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids her seat in Congress.