2020 United States redistricting cycle


The 2020 United States redistricting cycle will take place following the completion of the 2020 United States Census. In all fifty states, various bodies will re-draw state legislative districts. States that are apportioned more than one seat in the United States House of Representatives will also draw new districts for that legislative body.
The rules for redistricting vary from state to state, but all states draw new legislative and congressional maps either in the state legislature, in redistricting commissions, or through some combination of the state legislature and a redistricting commission. Though various laws and court decisions have put constraints on redistricting, many redistricting institutions continue to practice gerrymandering, which involves drawing new districts with the intention of giving a political advantage to specific groups. Political parties prepare for redistricting years in advance, and partisan control of redistricting institutions can provide a party with major advantages. Aside from the possibility of mid-decade redistricting, the districts drawn in the 2020 redistricting cycle will remain in effect until the next round of redistricting following the 2030 United States Census.

United States House of Representatives

Reapportionment

establishes the United States House of Representatives and apportions Representatives to the states based on population, with reapportionment occurring every ten years. The decennial United States Census determines the population of each state. Each of the fifty states is guaranteed at least one representative, and the Huntington–Hill method is used to assign the remaining 385 seats to states based on the population of each state. Congress has provided for reapportionment every ten years since the passage of the Reapportionment Act of 1929.
Since 1913, the U.S. House of Representatives has consisted of 435 members, a number set by statute, though the number of Representatives temporarily increased in 1959. Reapportionment also affects presidential elections, as each state is guaranteed electoral votes equivalent to the number of Representatives and Senators representing the state.
Prior to the 2022 elections, each state apportioned more than one Representative will draw new congressional districts based on the reapportionment following the 2020 Census. Based on projections of population growth, Northeastern and Midwestern states such as Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Minnesota may lose seats, while Western and Southern states such as Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Texas, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia may gain seats. The Southern states of Alabama and West Virginia may also lose seats. For the first time in the state's history, it's hinted California could lose a district, and Montana might regain the second district it lost after the 1990 Census.

Congressional redistricting methods

Each U.S. Representative represents one congressional district, which encompasses all or part of a single state. The states have wide latitude in the re-drawing of congressional districts, a process known as redistricting. State power over redistricting is subject to limits set by the U.S. Constitution, rulings of the federal judiciary and statutes passed by Congress. In the case of Wesberry v. Sanders, the Supreme Court of the United States established that states must draw districts that are equal in population "as nearly as is practicable." Subsequent court cases have required states to redistrict every ten years, although states can redistrict more often than that depending on their own statutes and constitutional provisions. Since the passage of the 1967 Uniform Congressional Districts Act, most states have been barred from using multi-member districts; all states currently use single-member districts. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 establishes protections against racial redistricting plans that would deny minority voters an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. The Supreme Court case of Thornburg v. Gingles established a test to determine whether redistricting lines violate the Voting Rights Act. In some states, courts have required the creation of majority-minority districts. Many states have also adopted other criteria, including compactness, contiguity, and the preservation of political subdivisions or communities of interest. Some states, including Arizona, require the drawing of competitive districts.
In most states, the state legislature draws the new districts, but some states have established redistricting commissions. Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, and Washington use independent commissions to draw House districts, while Hawaii and New Jersey use "politician commissions" to draw House districts. In all other states with multiple House districts, the legislature draws district lines, although some states have advisory commissions that can play a major role in drawing lines, and other states have backup commissions if the state legislature is unable to draw the lines itself. Most states draw new lines by passing a law the same way any other law is passed, but some states have special procedures. Connecticut and Maine require a 2/3 super-majorities in each house of the state legislature for redistricting plans, while district lines are not subject to gubernatorial veto in Connecticut and North Carolina. The Ohio redistricting process is designed to encourage the legislature to pass a map with bipartisan support, but the majority party can pass maps that last for four years without the support of the minority party. The legislatures of Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia can override gubernatorial vetoes with a simple majority vote, giving governors in those states little leverage in the drawing of new district maps.
Every state with more than one congressional district must pass a new redistricting plan before the filing deadlines of the 2022 elections. Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming are likely to continue to have only one representative in the House, and so will not have to draw new House districts. Rhode Island could also lose its second representative. Montana currently has only an at-large representative but some projections show the state gaining a second representative. In many states, districts are drawn with the intent to benefit certain political groups, including one of the two major political parties, in a practice known as gerrymandering. The elections preceding 2022 will determine which party controls the redistricting process in each state.

Control of congressional redistricting

Congressional redistricting plans passed by legislature

The table shows the partisan control of states in which congressional redistricting is enacted via a bill passed by the legislature. Partisan control in some states may change between the 2019 elections and the passage of redistricting plans. States in which the governor can technically veto the bill, but that veto can be overridden by a simple majority of the state legislature, are marked as "veto override."
An * indicates split control because a 2/3 super-majority vote is required in the legislature

A ↑ indicates that one party has control because of a veto-proof super-majority in the legislature

A † indicates that the state employs an advisory commission

A ‡ indicates that the state employs a backup commission

Congressional redistricting plans passed by independent commission

Four states with multiple members of the House of Representatives use independent commissions to draw Congressional districts. In Arizona and Washington, the four party leaders of the state house and state senate each select one member of the Independent Redistricting Commission, and these four members select a fifth member who is not affiliated with either party. In California, the Citizen's Redistricting Commission consists of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four individuals who are not members of either party. In Idaho, the four party leaders of the state house and state senate and the chairmen of the two most popular state parties each select a member of the Commission for Reapportionment.
If Montana receives a second district as a result of reapportionment, an independent commission will draw Congressional districts for the state.

Congressional redistricting plans passed by politician commission

Two states use politician commissions to draw Congressional districts. In Hawaii, the president of the state senate and the speaker of the state house each select two members of the Reapportionment Commission, while the minority parties in both chambers each appoint two members of the commission. The eight members of the commission then select a ninth member, who also chairs the commission. In New Jersey, the four party leaders of the state house and state senate and the party leaders of the two largest parties each choose two members of the Apportionment Commission, and the twelve members of the commission select a thirteenth member to chair the commission.

State legislatures

Each state draws new legislative district boundaries every ten years. Every state except Nebraska has a bicameral legislative branch. Nebraska is also unique in that it has the only legislative body that is officially non-partisan.

Legislative redistricting methods

The states have wide latitude in re-drawing legislative districts, but the U.S. Supreme Court case of Reynolds v. Sims established that states must draw districts that are "substantially equal" in population to one another. Federal court cases have established that deviation between the largest and smallest districts generally cannot be greater than ten percent. Some states have laws requiring less deviation. Court cases have also required states to redistrict every ten years, although states can redistrict more often than that depending on their own statutes and constitutional provisions. States are free to employ multi-member districts, and different districts can elect different numbers of legislators. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 establishes protections against racial redistricting plans that would deny minority voters an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. The Supreme Court case of Thornburg v. Gingles established a test to determine whether redistricting lines violate the Voting Rights Act. Many states have also adopted other criteria, including compactness, contiguity, and the preservation of political subdivisions or communities of interest. Some states, including Arizona, require the drawing of competitive districts, while other states require the nesting of state house districts within state senate districts.
Fifteen states use independent or politician commissions to draw state legislative districts. In the other states, the legislature is ultimately charged with drawing new lines, although some states have advisory or back-up commissions. Connecticut, Illinois, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas have backup commissions that draw district lines if the legislature is unable to agree on new districts. Iowa, Maine, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont employ advisory commissions. In Oregon, the Secretary of State will draw the legislative districts if legislature fails to do so. In Connecticut and Maine, a 2/3 super-majority vote in each house is required to create new districts, while in Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Mississippi, and North Carolina, the governor cannot veto redistricting plans. The legislatures of Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia can override gubernatorial vetoes with a simple majority vote, giving governors in those states little leverage in the drawing of new district maps.
Most states must pass redistricting plans by the time of the filing deadlines for the 2022 election. Virginia and New Jersey must pass new plans in 2021. Louisiana and Mississippi have a 2023 deadline, while Montana has a 2024 deadline. In many states, legislative districts are drawn with the intent to benefit certain political groups, including one of the two major political parties. The elections preceding 2022 will determine which parties and individuals control the redistricting process in states where the legislature draws the legislative districts.

Control of legislative redistricting

State legislative redistricting plans passed by legislature

The table shows the partisan control of states in which state legislative redistricting is enacted via a bill passed by the legislature. Partisan control in some states may change by the time redistricting plans are passed. States in which the governor can technically veto the bill, but that veto can be overridden by a simple majority of the state legislature, are marked as "veto override."
An * indicates split control because a 2/3 super-majority vote is required in the legislature

A ↑ indicates that one party has control because of a veto-proof super-majority in the legislature

A † indicates that the state employs an advisory commission

A ‡ indicates that the state employs a backup commission

State legislative redistricting plans passed by independent commission

Eight states use independent commissions to draw state legislative districts. In Alaska, the governor appoints two individuals and the Speaker of the House, senate president, and Chief Justice of the Alaska Supreme Court each appoint one individual to the Redistricting Board. In Arizona, Montana, and Washington, the four legislative party leaders each appoint one member to the redistricting commission, and these four individuals choose a fifth member to chair the commission. California's Citizen's Redistricting Commission consists of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four individuals who are not members of either party. Idaho's Commission for Reapportionment consists of six individuals appointed by the chairmen of the two largest parties and the four state legislative party leaders.

State legislative redistricting plans passed by politician commission

Six states, including Missouri, use politician commissions to draw state legislative districts. Arkansas's Board of Apportionment consists of the governor, secretary of state, and attorney general. The Ohio Redistricting Commission consists of the governor, auditor, secretary of state, and four individuals appointed by the state legislative party leaders. Hawaii's Reapportionment Commission consists of eight appointees of the state legislative party leaders, and these appointees select a ninth member to chair the commission. The New Jersey Apportionment Commission consists of twelve individuals appointed by the state legislative party leaders and the two major party chairmen, with these twelve individuals choosing a thirteenth member to chair the board. Pennsylvania's redistricting commission consists of four appointees chosen by the state legislative party leaders, and these four appointees choose a fifth member to chair the commission.
In Missouri, the state auditor, state senate majority leader, and state senate minority leader choose a non-partisan state demographer to draw the maps for both chambers of the state legislature. Missouri also has two redistricting commissions, one for each house, and each commission consists of individuals appointed by the governor based on lists created by the two major parties. The demographer's proposed maps can be altered if 70% of the commissioners approve of the changes.

Redistricting organizations and funds

Democrats were particularly unhappy with the results of the 2012 House elections in which Democratic House candidates received more votes than Republican House candidates, but Republicans retained control of the chamber. Organizations such as the Democratic Governors Association and the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee have established funds dedicated to helping Democrats in the 2020 round of redistricting.
Democrats also established the National Democratic Redistricting Committee to coordinate Democratic redistricting efforts. Republicans established a similar group, the National Republican Redistricting Trust.

Changes to the redistricting process since 2012

Federal court rulings

In the 2013 case, Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, which was a coverage formula that determined which states and counties required preclearance from the Justice Department before making changes to voting laws and procedures. The formula had covered states with a history of minority voter disenfranchisement, and the preclearance procedure was designed to block discriminatory voting practices. In the 2019 case of Rucho v. Common Cause, the Supreme Court held that claims of partisan gerrymandering present nonjusticiable political questions that cannot be reviewed by federal courts.
In another 2019 case, Department of Commerce v. New York, the Supreme Court blocked the Trump administration from adding a question to the 2020 Census regarding the citizenship of respondents.

State court rulings

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered the state to draw a new congressional map on the basis of a 2010 state constitutional amendment that banned partisan gerrymandering.
In 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court threw out the 2011 U.S. House of Representatives map on the grounds that it violated the state constitution; the court established new redistricting standards requiring districts to be compact and to minimize the splitting of counties and towns.
In 2019, a North Carolina state court struck down the state's legislative districts on the grounds that the district had been created with the partisan intent of favoring Republican candidates.

Ballot measures

In 2015, Ohio voters approved a ballot measure changing the composition of the commission charged with drawing state legislative districts, adding two legislative appointees to the commission and creating rules and guidelines designed to make partisan gerrymandering more difficult. In May 2018, Ohio voters approved a proposal that modified the state's congressional redistricting processes.
In 2018, voters in Colorado and Michigan approved of a proposal to establish an independent redistricting commission for congressional and state legislative districts in their respective states. Missouri voters approved of a proposal to have a "non-partisan state demographer" draw state legislative districts. In Utah, voters approved the creation of a redistricting commission to draw congressional and state legislative districts, though the Utah state legislature retains the power to reject these maps.