The US Justice Department has entered the fray in a lawsuit initiated by California Republicans, seeking to halt the state's recently passed congressional redistricting map.
This court case, filed in federal court, challenges the redistricting plan championed by the state's Democratic governor, which was developed in response to a Republican-led gerrymander in Texas.
"The state's electoral map constitutes a blatant attempt to seize control that violates voting rights and undermines the electoral system," stated the US attorney general.
The Democratic party have voiced assurance that the new maps will survive legal scrutiny.
"These opponents were defeated in the election and they are likely to face defeat in the judicial system," stated a representative for the governor.
Legal Basis
The legal challenge asserts that California's map improperly used race as a factor to heavily favor Hispanic voters in contravention of the federal constitution.
"It is unconstitutional to use race as a substitute to advance political interests, but that is precisely what the state legislature did with the redistricting measure," stated a senior official from the DOJ's civil rights unit.
Broader Implications
The legal battle represents the major counterpunch by the Democratic party in the ongoing redistricting war that started with Texas and has extended to multiple states.
Unlike other states, where GOP-controlled legislatures have implemented partisan maps, California's plan needed voter approval, which it received with nearly 65% of the vote.
National Implications
The Democratic party need to gain just a small number of Republican-held House seats to take control of the chamber in next year's congressional elections.
The party that holds the controlling share will influence the final years of the sitting president's term, determining whether a unified Republican Congress will continue to deliver its political program or face resistance, congressional probes and potential additional obstacles.
- Legal counsel for the challengers is being handled by a prominent law firm
- The firm's founder currently holds the position of assistant attorney general
- However, this individual has been removed from the current litigation
