Drawing the Lines Again: Why Texas Has Every Right to Redistrict Mid-Decade

[AustinLiberator]

When it comes to redistricting, Texas plays by the rules — both its own and those set by the U.S. Constitution. And contrary to the claims of political opponents and pundits, nothing in our governing documents forbids the Legislature from redrawing congressional districts in the middle of a decade. In fact, history and the highest court in the land have confirmed our right to do so.

The Texas Constitution: Clear on State, Silent on Federal

The Texas Constitution sets firm guidelines for redrawing state legislative districts — House and Senate seats — in Article III, Sections 25, 26, and 28. These provisions direct the Legislature to reapportion after each federal census and, if it fails, hand the job to the Legislative Redistricting Board. But these rules are specific to state government representation.

When it comes to U.S. congressional districts, the Texas Constitution is conspicuously silent. There is no timing requirement, no once-a-decade limit, and no prohibition on adjusting maps between census years. The authority here comes instead from the Legislature’s general lawmaking power under Article III, Section 1, which grants Texas the ability to pass laws “for the good of the people” — including how congressional districts are drawn.

Federal Authority and the U.S. Constitution

At the federal level, Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures the power to set the “Times, Places and Manner” of congressional elections, subject only to congressional override. That power includes deciding when to redraw district boundaries. Congress has never passed a law limiting redistricting to once per decade, leaving the matter in state hands.

The Supreme Court Has Spoken

In 2003, Texas exercised this authority, redrawing its congressional map midway through the decade under a Republican majority led by then–U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. The move sparked fierce political backlash and a flurry of lawsuits — but the ultimate ruling came from the U.S. Supreme Court in League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006).

The Court held that mid-decade redistricting is permissible under the U.S. Constitution. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy made it clear: the law does not require states to wait for the next census to change their congressional districts. As long as the new maps comply with equal population requirements, the Voting Rights Act, and other constitutional safeguards, the timing itself is not a legal defect.

Why This Matters

The ability to redraw maps mid-decade is not merely a partisan tactic — it is a legitimate exercise of Texas’s constitutional authority. Political realities shift, demographics evolve, and courts may strike down parts of existing maps, forcing the need for new boundaries. Waiting nearly a decade to respond to these changes would be legislative malpractice.

Moreover, in the modern era of rapid migration and population shifts, mid-decade redistricting ensures that representation in Washington reflects current realities rather than stale data.

The Bottom Line

The law is unambiguous:

• The Texas Constitution governs timing for state legislative districts, but places no restriction on congressional redistricting frequency.

• The U.S. Constitution entrusts the states — and specifically, their legislatures — with control over congressional election arrangements.

• The U.S. Supreme Court has explicitly upheld Texas’s right to redraw mid-decade in LULAC v. Perry.

Those who object to mid-term redistricting may dislike the politics, but they cannot claim it is illegal. Texas has both the authority and precedent to act — and when circumstances demand it, we should.

- David Crockett | The Austin Liberator