California GOP files emergency petition with SCOTUS to block Prop 50

LOS ANGELES (KESQ) - The California Republican Party and others today filed an emergency application at the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to block California from using the congressional district lines enacted through Proposition 50 for the 2026 midterm elections.

The emergency application in Tangipa v. Newsom asks Justice Elena Kagan, the justice assigned to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, to issue an injunction pending appeal that would temporarily reinstate the 2021 California Redistricting Commission map while the case is litigated.

The filing asks the court to act by Feb. 9, citing the start of California's candidate filing period and arguing that candidates and voters will face immediate effects if the Proposition 50 district lines remain in place.  

"California cannot create districts by race, and the state should not be allowed to lock in districts that break federal law,'' Corrin Rankin, California Republican Party chairwoman, said in a statement. "Our emergency application asks the Supreme Court to put the brakes on Prop. 50 now, before the Democrats try to run out the clock and force candidates and voters to live with unconstitutional congressional districts. Californians deserve fair districts and clean elections, not a backroom redraw that picks winners and losers based on race."

A three-judge panel in Los Angeles federal court last week ruled against California Republicans in their bid to nullify the new congressional map, which California voters approved in November.

In their lawsuit, filed one day after California voters approved Prop. 50, Assemblyman David Tangipa, R-Fresno, the California Republican Party and a group of Republican voters -- joined by the U.S. Department of Justice -- urged judges to block the new district lines at least temporarily so California's original map would stay in effect for the 2026 midterms.   

Prop. 50 was passed after Republicans in Texas redrew their congressional map, a move California leaders said was designed to favor Republicans in the upcoming midterms.   

The suit, which names Gov. Gavin Newsom, state Attorney General Rob Bonta and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber as defendants, argues the new Prop. 50 maps are unconstitutional because they improperly use voters' race as a factor in drawing districts and asked the court to block them from taking effect. 

The proposition's passage increases Democrats' chances of winning five additional U.S. House seats in the state in November and seizing control of the chamber. Democrats already hold a 43-9 advantage in the state's House delegation.

Republicans had asked the court for a preliminary injunction blocking the maps from being used in 2026. In its 2-1 decision, the court upheld the new congressional districts, rejecting plaintiffs' claims that the maps had been drawn to favor Latino voters over other voting groups.

Judge Josephine Staton, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote the ruling, with Judge Kenneth Lee, a President Donald Trump appointee, dissenting. Judge Wesley Hsu, appointed by former President Joe Biden, joined Staton in her ruling.

"We find that Challengers have failed to show that racial gerrymandering occurred, and we conclude that there is no basis for issuing a preliminary injunction,'' Staton wrote. "Our conclusion probably seems obvious to anyone who followed the news in the summer and fall of 2025."  

Voters overwhelmingly approved Prop. 50 in November, which supporters dubbed "The Election Rigging Response Act."

It establishes new congressional district maps for the 2026 midterm elections that will also be used for the 2028 and 2030 elections. An analysis by the election news website Ballotpedia said it would shift five Republican- held congressional districts to Democrats.   

Weber, a co-defendant in the lawsuit, said last week she was pleased the court acknowledged "that the will of California's voters should prevail. Our democracy is in jeopardy and the fight to maintain our constitutional right to vote must continue. ... Our democracy is worth protecting and today's ruling
was the right result."