The NPR Politics Podcast — Year In Review: Trump, Gerrymandering & Redistricting
Date: December 24, 2025
Hosts: Tamara Keith, Myles Parks, Ashley Lopez
Episode Overview
This episode takes a deep dive into how 2025 became a year of unprecedented redistricting turmoil, triggered by direct intervention from President Trump and the ensuing "arms race" between the parties. NPR's political reporters outline the causes, current state, and political consequences of rapid-fire mid-decade gerrymandering — explaining why it’s happening, who stands to gain or lose, and how both the courts and public are reacting.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Why Is There a Redistricting Frenzy in 2025?
-
Historical Background:
- Traditionally, redistricting follows the census, happening once a decade. Occasionally, legal challenges force mid-decade changes in select states.
- A 2019 Supreme Court decision removed federal court oversight from partisan gerrymandering cases, opening the door to more aggressive redistricting.
-
Catalyst for 2025:
- President Trump directly ordered Texas to redraw its districts for Republican gains, sparking a nationwide wave of mid-decade map-drawing by both parties.
- “President Trump… gave the order to Texas to redraw districts to give Republicans five new seats. And that has set off this avalanche across the country.” — Myles Parks [02:46]
-
Political Arms Race:
- Each party reacts to the other's redistricting moves, leading to continual tit-for-tat changes.
- The slim Republican House majority exacerbates the urgency and stakes.
2. State-by-State: Who's Redrawing What?
-
States with Confirmed Redistricting:
- Texas: Maps redrawn; court-approved — a solid Republican gain.
- California: Ballot measure approved to allow a Democratic-friendly redraw, process is starting.
- Missouri: Republican-led redraw, but a voter referendum is underway to potentially overturn it.
- North Carolina: Republican gerrymander completed.
- Ohio: Bipartisan process, results less lopsided than expected.
- Utah: Court-ordered redistricting.
-
States with Ongoing/Uncertain Status:
Virginia, Florida, New York, Indiana (notably, Indiana’s GOP legislature rebuffed pressure to draw new maps despite direct administration involvement and public harassment). -
Key Insight:
- “It's getting to the point where it's like a quarter of the states are now in play and you're like, okay, this is happening here, this is happening. It's just a lot to keep track of, you know.” — Myles Parks [05:53]
3. Political Calculus: Who’s Likely to Benefit?
-
Net Changes Projected:
- Best-case Republican scenario: net 4–5 new House seats.
- Best-case Democratic scenario: net 2–4 seats.
- Most likely outcome is a near wash, barring a major court ruling.
-
Wild Card:
- Should the Supreme Court strike down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, there could be sweeping new redraws in Southern states that currently have minority-majority districts, potentially costing Democrats a dozen seats.
- “If they decide that [race] is not acceptable, then you could see this rash of redistricting… Democrats lose up to a dozen or more seats potentially.” — Myles Parks [10:43]
-
Voter Turnout Uncertainty:
- Democrats have overperformed in 2025 special elections, but general election turnout remains a wild card.
- “If the electorate that turns out is swinging in like a 15 point direction towards Democrats, that's not super helpful. That is now a competitive seat for Democrats that Republicans do for themselves.” — Ashley Lopez [12:04]
4. Do Voters Care — Or Even Understand?
-
Voter Sentiment:
- Many voters support partisan redraws when their preferred party benefits, especially in direct response to the other side’s actions.
- There's widespread abstract opposition to partisan gerrymandering.
- “When you just flat out question of like, do you like this?... more than 80% of voters said, we'd like partisan politics to be taken out of this.” — Myles Parks [13:56]
- Deep confusion and frustration abound; redistricting is hard to follow and feels undemocratic.
-
Specifics:
- In California, 64% supported a pro-Democratic redraw via ballot, citing existential partisan stakes.
- Yet, 60% of Americans — including majorities of Republicans and independents — oppose mid-decade redistricting itself.
-
Memorable Observations:
- “No one seemed to be clicking their heels like this was a great thing, broadly speaking. It doesn't say great things about our democracy.” — Ashley Lopez [15:03]
- “I feel like it's underrated also how confusing it is for voters... I mean, you think about… how many voters think their congressperson is one person and then… go to vote… and it's a completely different person now.” — Myles Parks [16:15]
- “People were just surprised that partisan redistricting is even legal. Like, it sounds like unfair to people. It sounds like something that should be illegal.” — Ashley Lopez [16:39]
5. Can Reform or Nonpartisan Redistricting Make a Comeback?
-
Structural Obstacles:
- Only Congress could call for uniform national reforms, but entrenched interests and lack of political will make this unlikely.
- “If there was going to be a time, it would be… when wide majorities of voters feel disillusioned and feel angry with the way things are.” — Myles Parks [17:59]
-
Barriers to Change:
- Legislators rarely pass reforms that reduce their job security.
- States don't want to "unilaterally disarm" if others keep gerrymandering.
- Supreme Court has signaled that it’s no longer the venue for challenges.
-
Other Practical Limits:
- Repeated redistricting is costly for state legislatures and unpopular with the electorate.
- Uncertainty may eventually tip public opinion or legislative action.
Memorable Quotes & Moments
-
On Trump’s Role:
“President Trump… gave the order to Texas to redraw districts… that has set off this avalanche across the country.” — Myles Parks [02:46] -
On Voter Confusion:
“How many voters think their congressperson is one person and then… it's a completely different person now… it's just really confusing and hard for voters to keep track of.” — Myles Parks [16:15] -
On Voters' Feelings:
“People were just surprised that partisan redistricting is even legal. Like, it sounds like unfair to people. …everyone is just sort of surprised to find out that the Supreme Court's like, yeah, have at it.” — Ashley Lopez [16:39] -
On Systemic Dysfunction:
“No one seemed to be clicking their heels like this was a great thing, broadly speaking. It doesn't say great things about our democracy.” — Ashley Lopez [15:03] -
On Potential for Reform:
“I feel like personally it has to come from Congress if it's going to come. …But you know, if there was going to be a time, it would be at a time when wide majorities of voters feel disillusioned…” — Myles Parks [17:59]
Important Timestamps
- 01:19 — Why is mid-decade redistricting exploding now?
- 02:46 — Trump’s direct intervention and its ripple effect
- 04:18 — States that have already redrawn, and those facing backlash
- 06:05 — Indiana GOP pushes back against partisan pressure
- 09:01 — Political outcomes: possible seat gains and wildcards
- 10:43 — The Voting Rights Act and its pivotal Supreme Court case
- 12:04 — Could GOP gerrymanders backfire with current voter trends?
- 13:56 — What polls say about public attitudes toward gerrymandering
- 15:03 — Voters’ conflicted feelings and democratic implications
- 17:59 — Can nonpartisan reform happen, or is Congress the only hope?
Conclusion
This episode paints a portrait of a system in crisis: a gerrymandering arms race kicked off by direct presidential involvement, enabled by Supreme Court decisions, and propelled by anxious partisans in legislatures and among voters. The immediate political ramifications are unclear and will depend on court rulings and voter turnout, but the erosion of clarity, public trust, and stable democratic processes is unmistakable. For now, the hosts argue, real reform is unlikely without congressional intervention and a groundswell of public pressure.
Contributors:
- Tamara Keith: White House coverage
- Myles Parks: Voting coverage
- Ashley Lopez: Politics coverage