Consider This from NPR: How Gerrymandering Became a Blood Sport Release Date: August 5, 2025

In this episode of NPR's "Consider This," host Ari Shapiro delves into the escalating battles over gerrymandering in the United States, exploring how what was once a standard political maneuver has transformed into a fierce and potentially destructive confrontation between parties. Through expert analysis and firsthand accounts, the episode unpacks the strategies, motivations, and implications of aggressive redistricting efforts, particularly focusing on recent developments in Texas and their national ramifications.

Introduction to the Gerrymandering Conflict

Ari Shapiro opens the discussion by highlighting President Trump's recent statements about redrawing Texas's congressional districts to favor Republicans. This move aims to secure an additional five seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, a strategy made feasible by the absence of federal restrictions on partisan gerrymandering, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2019.

[00:00] Ari Shapiro: "President Trump is quite explicit about what's happening in Texas. Just a very simple redrawing. We pick up five seats."

The potential impact of these changes is significant, with the added seats possibly tipping the balance of power in the House come 2026. Democrats are responding by mobilizing at the state level, with strategies ranging from legal challenges to outright resistance.

Democratic Resistance and Retaliation

Texas Democrats, feeling the pressure of potential losses, have taken drastic measures to counteract the redistricting efforts. State Representative Gina Hinojosa has publicly condemned the plans, emphasizing their undemocratic nature and commitment to fighting them.

[00:59] Gina Hinojosa: "It is undemocratic. It is anti the foundations of our country, and it is extreme and harmful to our constituents. So we will do everything in our power to fight it."

Similarly, New York Governor Kathy Hochul has voiced frustration over the limitations imposed by independent redistricting commissions, contemplating the dissolution or alteration of such bodies to reclaim control over district drawing.

[01:32] Kathy Hochul: "Other states don't have the same aspirations that we always have had, and I hold those dear. But I cannot ignore that this. The playing field has changed dramatically."

Expert Insights: The Nuclear Arms Race for House Control

To shed light on the broader implications of these maneuvers, Ari Shapiro welcomes Dave Wasserman, senior editor and political analyst for the Cook Political Report. Wasserman characterizes the current gerrymandering efforts as a "nuclear arms race" aimed at securing House majority amidst a precarious political landscape.

[03:22] Ari Shapiro: "Fights over congressional maps never used to be this intense... David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report has called this a nuclear arms race for House control."

Wasserman elaborates on the term, explaining that with the House margins extremely narrow, both parties are aggressively seeking every possible advantage across various states.

[03:51] Dave Wasserman: "Given the margin in the House, which is it couldn't be hardly any tighter than it is. Every party is clawing for every advantage that they can get from state to state."

He underscores the interconnectedness of state-level redistricting battles, noting that actions in Texas are just the beginning of a nationwide struggle to influence congressional representation.

Strategies and Potential Retaliations

The conversation progresses to discuss potential retaliatory measures, particularly from Democratic strongholds like California. Governor Gavin Newsom has hinted at ballot initiatives that could counteract Republican gerrymandering efforts, though opportunities for such actions are limited outside a few key states.

[04:27] Dave Wasserman: "California, under Governor Gavin Newsom, is threatening to retaliate by setting up an amendment, a ballot initiative that voters could approve this fall."

Despite these aggressive tactics, Wasserman remains cautiously optimistic about Democrats' prospects in the 2026 elections, citing historical trends and current political dynamics that could still favor a Democratic resurgence.

[04:14] Dave Wasserman: "What we know, though, is that Democrats will still have a chance to win control of the House in 2026, even if Republicans add three to five additional seats in Texas, two in Ohio..."

The Future of Redistricting Reforms

A critical point of discussion revolves around the future of independent redistricting commissions. Historically, blue states have championed these reforms to promote fairness and reduce partisan bias. However, the current climate has forced Democrats to reconsider these protections in favor of more immediate electoral gains.

[05:35] Dave Wasserman: "Predominantly, it was blue states that embraced redistricting reform in the last few decades and implemented an independent and bipartisan commissions."

This shift indicates a strategic pivot, where maximizing electoral advantages takes precedence over long-established reform measures, potentially undermining efforts to create impartial district maps.

Challenges and the Role of the Judiciary

The episode also touches upon the limitations imposed by the judiciary on addressing partisan gerrymandering. The Supreme Court has effectively stymied federal legal challenges by declaring gerrymandering a political issue without clear standards for adjudication.

[07:45] Dave Wasserman: "The Supreme Court has ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims can't be brought in federal courts because it is fundamentally a political matter and there's no clear standard for what constitutes gerrymandering or not."

This judicial stance has emboldened partisan mapmakers, further entrenching the gerrymandering "arms race" as both parties seek to exploit loopholes within diverse state-specific redistricting laws.

Conclusion: A Grim Outlook or a Path Forward?

As the episode draws to a close, Wasserman emphasizes the complexity and variability of redistricting efforts across different states, suggesting that while the battle is intense, it is not uniform or unmanageable. The future hinges on state-level decisions and voter responses to aggressive gerrymandering tactics.

[08:22] Dave Wasserman: "Well, we'll be watching to see how several of these states shake out... when it is framed in terms of taking the fight to Donald Trump, California voters will probably get behind that..."

Ari Shapiro wraps up the discussion by acknowledging the high stakes involved and the profound impact these battles over district maps will have on the balance of power in upcoming elections.

Key Takeaways:

• Partisan Gerrymandering as a Strategic Weapon: Both Republicans and Democrats are employing aggressive redistricting strategies to gain electoral advantages, likened to a "nuclear arms race."

• State-Level Maneuvering: The tug-of-war over district maps is playing out primarily at the state level, with significant actions in Texas and potential retaliations in states like California and New York.

• Erosion of Independent Redistricting Commissions: Traditional safeguards against partisan map-drawing are being reconsidered or dismantled in response to the pressures of electoral competition.

• Judicial Limitations: The Supreme Court's stance on gerrymandering as a non-justiciable political issue has limited federal oversight, empowering state-level partisans.

• Future Electoral Implications: The outcomes of these redistricting battles will have substantial ramifications for the control of the U.S. House of Representatives in future elections, particularly in 2026.

This episode of "Consider This" provides a comprehensive examination of the current state of gerrymandering in American politics, highlighting the critical and contentious nature of redistricting in shaping the nation's legislative landscape.