DOJ sues California, Newsom over new congressional map favoring Dems

The legal challenge targets the redistricting framework created under Proposition 50, which shifted responsibility for drawing congressional districts from an independent commission to the state legislature. The new map favors Democrats in the upcoming 2026 midterms.

According to the Justice Department, evidence from legislative records and public statements indicates that race, specifically Latino voter demographics, was the predominant factor guiding the legislature’s redrawing of district boundaries. Federal officials argue this reliance on racial considerations constitutes an unlawful racial gerrymander.

“California’s redistricting scheme is a brazen power grab that tramples on civil rights and mocks the democratic process,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in announcing the suit. She accused the Newsom administration of attempting to “entrench one-party rule and silence millions of Californians.”

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Jesus A. Osete echoed the allegation, contending that lawmakers used race as a proxy for political goals. “Californians were sold an illegal, racially gerrymandered map, but the US Constitution prohibits its use in 2026 and beyond,” he said.

Bill Essayli, First Assistant US Attorney for the Central District of California, added that while states have broad authority to design congressional boundaries, “they may not be drawn based on race.”

The Justice Department has moved to intervene in Tangipa et al. v. Newsom, an ongoing lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The suit seeks to block the implementation of the new map before the 2026 election cycle.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon has recused herself from the case. The department confirmed that Osete will lead the government’s representation moving forward.

The federal court is expected to consider the department’s motion to intervene in the coming weeks. If successful, the lawsuit could delay or overturn the state’s newly approved redistricting plan, setting up a significant legal showdown over the role of race in electoral map-drawing.