100percentfedup.com
PANIC MODE: Redistricting & Key SCOTUS Case Could Spell Doom for Democrats Ahead of 2026
Things are starting to get very interesting ahead of 2026…
With multiple red states now re-drawing their Congressional maps, Democrats are poised to lose a significant amount of seats — even if Newsom’s gerrymandering attempt in California succeeds.
That’s already bad news for Democrats, but it gets even worse.
The Supreme Court is also getting ready to rule on a case that could gut the Voting Rights Act.
If this happens, Democrats could lose 19 more seats before 2026!
Rightfully so, Democrats are beginning to freak out, and CNN is sounding the alarm.
Watch this:
Democrats are PANICKING over how many seats Republicans will gain with redistricting.
And if the Supreme Court rightly guts the racist portions of the Voting Rights Act, that’s another 19 Dem seats GONE and Democrats are SUNK. pic.twitter.com/BSJLvvwBVW
— Mila Joy (@MilaLovesJoe) October 20, 2025
Here’s a clearer clip of that CNN segment:
BREAKING: Panic is worsening among Democrats after it sinks in just how many Republican House seats will be picked up through redistricting by 2026
“Democrats could lose 19 SEATS! This is a HUGE amount!”
“Florida could be a gold mine! […] EVERYTHING left over is an… pic.twitter.com/6W6QNhz8xx
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 14, 2025
BREAKING: Panic is worsening among Democrats after it sinks in just how many Republican House seats will be picked up through redistricting by 2026
“Democrats could lose 19 SEATS! This is a HUGE amount!”
“Florida could be a gold mine! […] EVERYTHING left over is an advantage to the Republicans!”
“The Supreme Court is CONSIDERING the end of the Voting Rights Act!”
Total devastation.
Within the next few months, the Supreme Court will hear a case that could significantly weaken the Voting Rights Act, which currently allows Democrats to segregate districts based on race.
Sounds rather unconstitutional, doesn’t it?
Reuters has more details on the upcoming SCOTUS hearing:
The Voting Rights Act, a landmark law barring discrimination in voting, was a product of the U.S. civil rights era, sought by Nobel Peace Prize recipient Martin Luther King, passed by Congress and signed by Democratic President Lyndon Johnson in 1965.
Six decades later, it faces its greatest threat, with the U.S. Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, looking poised to hollow out one key section after gutting a different one in 2013.
The court is expected to rule in the coming months in a case argued on Wednesday concerning a map delineating U.S. House of Representatives districts in Louisiana. The conservative justices signaled they could undercut the law’s Section 2, which bars voting maps that would result in diluting the voting power of minorities, even without direct proof of racist intent.
In doing so, the court would not be striking down the Voting Rights Act. But the question is what will be left of the law after the court issues its decision.
“If the court further weakens Section 2, states and localities, including those with long histories of discrimination, could be free to draw maps that systematically silence Black, Latino, Native and Asian American voters,” said Sarah Brannon, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Project.
Black people make up about a third of the population in Louisiana, and white people make up a majority. The state has six U.S. House districts. Louisiana’s Republican-led legislature added a second Black-majority district in response to a judge’s ruling that an earlier map it had approved containing just one Black-majority district likely harmed Black voters in violation of Section 2.
A group of white voters sued to block the map. They argued that the map was guided too heavily by race in violation of constitutional provisions promising equal protection under the law and that the right to vote cannot be denied on the basis of race. Those provisions were ratified to safeguard the rights of Black Americans following the Civil War of 1861-1865 that ended the practice of slavery in Southern states including Louisiana.
President Donald Trump‘s administration sided with the white voters. It stopped short of calling for invalidating Section 2. But it proposed a framework for cases involving Section 2 that would clamp down on “excessive consideration of race” and give states more leeway to accomplish “race-neutral principles,” such as protecting lawmakers already serving in Congress.
Justice Department lawyer Hashim Mooppan told the justices that “under the Constitution, the problem is not the mere consideration of race in districting. The problem is when race subordinates traditional neutral principles and is the factor that cannot be compromised.”
The framework that Mooppan promoted would supplant a test set by the Supreme Court in a 1986 case called Thornburg v. Gingles for determining when an electoral map has sufficiently diminished minority voting power to be deemed unlawful.
“The reason why Section 2, as it’s being construed in Gingles, is a problem is it’s saying that you have to create a district for Black Democrats that you would never create for white Democrats in a Republican state,” Mooppan said.
The Justice Department’s approach would “effectively gut” Section 2, according to George Washington University law professor Spencer Overton.
“If adopted, Section 2 cases would still exist on paper but would be nearly impossible to win,” Overton said. “Courts could dismiss claims before trial, giving state legislatures free rein to entrench their power and sideline voters of color.”
In practice, if SCOTUS limits Section 2 of the Voting Rights amendment, then 19 of these Democrat race-based districts could be eliminated.
But, even if the Voting Rights Act remains unchanged, Democrats could still lose around six to 12 seats total.
Grok explained in-depth:
Overview: Congressional redistricting typically follows the decennial U.S. Census, but mid-decade changes are occurring in 2025 due to court orders, legal requirements, or partisan pushes led by President Trump to bolster the GOP’s slim House majority (currently 220R-215D). Republicans could net 6–12 seats, while Democrats might offset 3–5; uncertainties include lawsuits, referendums, and a Supreme Court case on the Voting Rights Act (VRA Section 2) in Louisiana v. Callais, which could enable broader GOP gains (up to 19 seats) if protections are weakened.
Texas:
Status: New Republican map signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) in August 2025, targeting Democratic urban/suburban areas; lawsuits filed, possible referendum.
Current Delegation: 25R-13D (1D vacancy).
Projected R Gains: +5.
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: +5 R.
Notes: Dilutes minority voting power; aims to flip 5 Democratic seats.
California:
Status: Democratic legislature passed revised map in August 2025; requires voter approval via November 2025 ballot to bypass independent commission.
Current Delegation: 9R-43D.
Projected R Gains: 0.
Projected D Gains: +5.
Net Impact: +5 D.
Notes: Targets 5 Republican districts; opposed by GOP figures like Arnold Schwarzenegger; could counter Texas if approved.
Missouri:
Status: New Republican map signed by Gov. Mike Kehoe (R) in September 2025; voter referendum possible via signatures; lawsuits challenging mid-decade redraw.
Current Delegation: 6R-2D.
Projected R Gains: +1.
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: +1 R.
Notes: Splits Democratic-leaning Kansas City to favor GOP in 7 of 8 districts.
Ohio:
Status: Legally required redraw by November 30, 2025 (2021 map lacked bipartisan support per state constitution); GOP legislature proposing partisan map.
Current Delegation: 10R-5D.
Projected R Gains: +2–3.
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: +2–3 R.
Notes: Targets Democratic Reps. like Marcy Kaptur and Emilia Sykes; commission may intervene.
Florida:
Status: Republican select committee formed in August 2025; Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) supports redraw, potentially via census challenge for an extra seat.
Current Delegation: 20R-8D.
Projected R Gains: +2–3.
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: +2–3 R.
Notes: Builds on 2022 DeSantis gerrymander; state constitution limits overt partisanship, but eyes suburban gains.
North Carolina:
Status: Republican legislature considering new map in October 2025 special session, per Trump’s urging.
Current Delegation: 10R-4D.
Projected R Gains: +1–2.
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: +1–2 R.
Notes: Targets Democratic seats in Raleigh-Durham; Republicans hold 10 of 14 districts.
Indiana:
Status: Republican leaders discussing special session; state law limits to post-census, but supermajority could amend.
Current Delegation: 7R-2D.
Projected R Gains: +1.
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: +1 R.
Notes: Targets Democratic Rep. Frank Mrvan’s Lake County district.
Nebraska:
Status: Republican leaders exploring mid-decade redraw; GOP state chair supports protecting vulnerable seats.
Current Delegation: 3R-0D.
Projected R Gains: 0 (defensive).
Projected D Gains: 0.
Net Impact: 0.
Notes: Focuses on competitive 2nd District after Rep. Don Bacon (R) retires; limited offensive potential.
Utah:
Status: Court-mandated redraw ordered; GOP legislature must comply with nonpartisan commission ignored in 2022.
Current Delegation: 4R-0D.
Projected R Gains: 0.
Projected D Gains: +1.
Net Impact: +1 D.
Notes: Could restore competitive Salt Lake City district.
Louisiana:
Status: Ongoing Supreme Court case (Louisiana v. Callais) on VRA Section 2; potential redraw if protections struck down (ruling expected 2026).
Current Delegation: 5R-1D.
Projected R Gains: +1.
Projected D Gains: -1.
Net Impact: +2 R.
Notes: Could eliminate majority-Black district; timing may delay for 2026; Democrats filing legislation for 2026 session.
Key Takeaways:
Republican Advantage: Fewer hurdles in red states; potential net +12 if all succeed, locking in House control.
Democratic Challenges: Limited by commissions in blue states (e.g., nascent efforts in NY, IL, MD unlikely for 2026).
Uncertainties: VRA ruling could flip more seats nationwide but may not implement in time; overall reduces competitive races, entrenching partisanship.
In summary, Democrats are screwed — and, they very well could be for a long time if Republicans gain enough seats to secure House control through 2030 and beyond…
And, that doesn’t even take into account people fleeing blue states for red states.
The 2030 census could prove to be another huge nightmare for Democrats that they just can’t wake up from.
Get your popcorn.
Let’s see how this all plays out.
New Posts (Home)
ChatBox
Popular Posts 
Game Zone
Top PodCasts
Bitchute
