The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a bid by California Republicans to block a new congressional map that would likely net five additional House seats for Democrats in the 2026 midterm elections. The high court’s decision to dismiss the emergency appeal allows the map enacted by Proposition 50 to move forward. BREAKING: The US Supreme Court has just allowed California’s new Congressional map heavily favoring Democrats to take effect BEFORE the midterm elections in November ALL REPUBLICAN STATES MUST REDRAW THEIR MAPS *NOW!* Democrats will likely gain at least 5 seats in CA. We… pic.twitter.com/MqvdiheSOb — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 4, 2026 SCOTUSblog explained further: In a one-sentence order, the justices turned down a request from a group of California Republicans that would have required the state to continue to use the map in place for the last several federal elections in the state while their challenge to the map moves forward. There were no public dissents from the court’s ruling. The court’s order came exactly two months after the justices, over a dissent by the court’s three Democratic appointees, granted a request from Texas to allow it to use a new map intended to allow Republicans to pick up five additional House seats in that state. In Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, the lower court had agreed with the challengers that the “legislature’s motive was predominantly racial.” But the majority put that ruling on hold in its Dec. 4 order, with Justice Samuel Alito – who penned an opinion (joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorusch) concurring in the ruling – stating that “it is indisputable … that the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.” California’s path to the enactment of its new map was slightly more complicated than in Texas. The California Legislature adopted the new map in August, but under the state constitution an independent redistricting commission – rather than the Legislature – normally has the power to redistrict. The legislation adopting the new map therefore proposed a ballot initiative, known as Proposition 50, that would amend the constitution to allow the use of the new map from 2026 through 2030. By a roughly two-to-one margin, the state’s voters approved the initiative in a special election on Nov. 4. “While I am disappointed that the Supreme Court decided to not issue an injunction in the Proposition 50 case, this is not the end of the road. This case will move back to the district court where we resolve the merits of the lawsuit. This case will probably end up back at the Supreme Court very soon where the Court will need to address the merits of the case,” attorney Mark Meuser said. “At the end of the day, we did everything we could to try to stop Gavin Newsom’s unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The 2026 elections will be run on what I believe are unconstitutional maps. However, as the case works its way back through the court system, it is still possible that the Court to stop the Proposition 50 map from controlling the 2028 and 2030 elections,” he continued. While I am disappointed that the Supreme Court decided to not issue an injunction in the Proposition 50 case, this is not the end of the road. This case will move back to the district court where we resolve the merits of the lawsuit. This case will probably end up back at the… — Mark Meuser (@MarkMeuser) February 4, 2026 Fox News shared more: Proposition 50, according to Newsom, was a way to fight what he called President Donald Trump’s “power grab in Texas,” which passed its own map intended to give Republicans five seats. Newsom and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott both professed that their redistricting efforts were grounded in politics and that race was not a predominant factor in the map drawing process. But lawyers for California Republicans argued to the Supreme Court that state officials “harbored another purpose as well: maximizing Latino voting strength to shore up Latino support for the Democratic Party.” The lawyers called Proposition 50 a “pernicious and unconstitutional use of race.” The Supreme Court greenlit Texas’ map in December, reversing a lower court decision that had blocked it. Its decision on California’s map now effectively cancels out the two states’ mid-cycle redistricting maneuvers.