Partisan Gerrymandering (2019): In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims are "political questions" beyond the reach of federal courts, effectively allowing state legislatures to draw maps for political advantage.
If politically motivated Trump can ask TX to add four Republican districts, a political motive, then CA's governor should be able to ask the people of CA.
If the SCOTUS overrules lower courts' rulings on California won't be the first time it has shown its bias. The SCOTUS frequently overrules lower court decisions originating from California, particularly from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which has a high reversal rate, with 10 cases originating from that circuit in the 2023-2024 term alone.
Notable recent examples include overturning California-based restrictions on immigration enforcement in 2025 and addressing landmark cases with California roots, such as Whitney v. California (1927), which was later overruled.
Immigration Enforcement (2025): The Supreme Court lifted restrictions imposed by lower California courts that had temporarily restrained ICE from using certain,, criticized tactics (such as profiling based on race/language) in Southern California.
Environmental Law (2023): The Supreme Court allowed the overturning of a Berkeley ordinance banning natural gas in new construction, siding against a city-level regulation.
Criminal Procedure/Search and Seizure: Robbins v. California (1981) was overruled just 11 months later by United States v. Ross (1982), marking a rapid reversal.
The "too close to elections" argument is probably what Democrats could be using, since it's worked for Repubs in the past.
BUT when it comes to Republican states, The SCOTUS has supported state-drawn district maps primarily by allowing maps to stand during ongoing litigation using the "Purcell principle" (avoiding changes close to elections), refusing to intervene in partisan gerrymandering cases, and recently allowing challenged maps to remain in place. Key examples include upholding South Carolina's map in 2024 and allowing Alabama's map for 2022.
South Carolina (2024): The Supreme Court allowed South Carolina to use a congressional map that a lower court had previously ruled was a racial gerrymander, enabling its use for the 2024 election cycle.
Alabama (2022): In Merrill v. Milligan, the Court stayed a lower court decision that had deemed Alabama’s map likely in violation of the Voting Rights Act, allowing the map to be used for the 2022 midterms.
Florida (2025): The Florida Supreme Court, upholding a map defended by the governor, was left in place, reflecting a trend of allowing state-level decisions on maps.
While the Court sometimes allows maps to stand, it also invalidated Alabama's map in 2023 for violating Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
The SCOTUS maga six, despite the appearance of fairness, are in it for RW Repubs to win it, imo.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/supreme-court-hammers-away-democracy
= new reply since forum marked as read