Trump allies notch redistricting win as judges find no 'smoking gun' to scrap red state map
A redrawn Tennessee congressional map expected to give Republicans a 9-0 advantage in congressional seats will remain in place for the state's Aug. 6 primary, handing President Donald Trump and his allies another victory as they work to preserve the GOP's House majority ahead of the midterm elections.
A three-judge panel on Thursday denied a request for a preliminary injunction filed by a group of Black Tennessee voters and civil rights organizations, who argued the map intentionally sought to weaken the power of Black voters.
The lawsuit stems from Tennessee lawmakers redrawing the state's congressional map during a special session in May after the Supreme Court's ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, which made it harder to challenge redistricting plans on racial discrimination grounds. The new map split Memphis and Shelby County into three congressional districts, effectively dismantling Tennessee's only majority-Black district. Republican lawmakers said the goal was to create a map that favored Republicans in all nine congressional districts and help preserve the GOP's majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The judges — two Trump-appointed judges and one appointed by President Barack Obama — concluded the evidence pointed to partisan politics as the driving force behind the redistricting.
"At bottom, Plaintiffs won't succeed on their vote-dilution claim because they haven't presented meaningful evidence that race — not politics — motivated Tennessee's May 2026 map," the judges wrote.
The judges contrasted the case with the Supreme Court's 2017 decision in Cooper v. Harris, where the High Court ruled that there was direct evidence that race influenced the redistricting process.
"Plaintiffs' evidence is a far cry from the 'smoking gun' direct evidence in Cooper v. Harris."
As evidence, the plaintiffs pointed to the map itself, which eliminates the state's only majority-minority district; lawmakers' use of census data containing racial demographics; the unusual timing of the mid-decade redistricting; Tennessee's history of racial discrimination; and affidavits from Black Memphis voters who said the new map diluted their voting strength.
"Plaintiffs present no direct evidence, weak circumstantial evidence, and no path for Tennessee to accomplish its political aims without producing the same effect," the judges wrote.
WHERE TRUMP, GOP VS DEMOCRATS REDISTRICTING BATTLE HEADS NEXT IN WAKE OF KEY COURT RULINGS
Amber Sherman, a plaintiff in the lawsuit and an affected voter, called the panel's rejection of the preliminary injunction "painful."
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
"The decisions by this court continue to further the disenfranchisement of Black voters in Memphis," Sherman said in a statement. "We deserve the same opportunity to shape our future as anyone else. When our voting power is diluted, our neighborhoods have a harder time making their voices heard on the issues that shape our daily lives."
While the preliminary injunction was denied, the lawsuit remains ongoing.
Since Trump began urging GOP-led states to pursue mid-decade redistricting, at least eight states have adopted new congressional maps, with Republicans hoping to gain seats in Texas, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Alabama, Louisiana and Tennessee. Democrats have responded with redistricting efforts in California, Utah and Virginia, although Virginia's new map was later struck down by the state's Supreme Court.