The Dictatorship

In the wake of the Virginia ruling, where does the national redistricting arms race stand?

Published

1 month ago

May 8, 2026

In the wake of the Virginia ruling, where does the national redistricting arms race stand?

In Virginia, a majority of the House of Delegates voted to approve a new congressional district map that was designed to help Democrats add as many as four seats in the U.S. House. A majority of the state Senate agreed, as did the commonwealth’s popularly elected governor. The issue then went to the people of Virginia, and a majority of voters backed the redistricting initiative, too.

A majority of the Virginia Supreme Court, however, rejected the plan anyway. MS NOW reported:

The Virginia Supreme Court on Friday struck down a voter-approved congressional redistricting plan, ruling that Democrats violated constitutional procedures when placing the referendum on the ballot for last month’s special election. […]

In its 4-3 decision, the court on Friday found that the process used to place the amendment on the ballot did not comply with Virginia’s constitutional rules governing how such proposals must be approved by the legislature before being presented to voters. As a result, the justices upheld a lower court ruling that blocks the amendment from being certified and implemented.

For Democratic efforts on the national level, the ruling is an unexpected gut punch, especially given the fact that after Virginia voters approved the overhauled map last month, it appeared that Democrats would be able to keep pace with the GOP as part of the broader redistricting fight.

What’s more, the state Supreme Court ruling comes on the heels of a similarly brutal blow after Republican-appointed U.S. Supreme Court justices gutted the Voting Rights Act, which opened the door even further to an intensified Republican effort to erase majority-Black congressional districts in the South.

Given all of this, it’s easy to imagine many Americans responding to the head-spinning developments with a simple question: “So where do things stand now?”

Before we dig in on that, it’s worth pausing to acknowledge the absurdity of the circumstances. For generations, states redrew congressional district lines after the decennial census. There were limited exceptions, but in nearly all of those instances, mid-decade redistricting only happened when courts told states that their maps were unlawful and needed to be redone.

The idea that politicians would simply choose to start redrawing maps, in the middle of a decade, in pursuit of partisan advantages, was practically unheard of.

Last year, however, Donald Trump, fearing the results of the 2026 midterm elections and the possible accountability that would result from Democratic victories, decided that the American model needed to be discarded. It was time, the president said, to pursue what one White House official described as a campaign of “maximum warfare” in which Republican officials in key states would embrace gerrymandering without regard for fairness, norms, traditions or propriety.

The goal was simple: Deliver Republican victories in congressional races long before Americans had a chance to cast their ballots.

The result was an arms race that’s still going on — and here’s where things stand.

A map of the United States highlighting states that have redrawn their congressional maps — As of May 8, 2026. *Virginia’s voter-approved congressional redistricting plan was struck down by the Virginia Supreme Court Ben King / MS NOW; Source: MaddowBlog election analysis

Texas: Republicans in the Lone Star State got the ball rolling last summer, acting at Trump’s behest and approving a map designed to give Republicans five additional U.S. House seats. It touched off the national arms race.

California: Responding to Texas, Democratic officials in the Golden State, as well as the state’s voters, approved a map of their own designed to give Democrats five additional U.S. House seats.

Missouri: In September, state Republicans approved a map designed to give the GOP one additional seat.

North Carolina: In October, state Republicans approved a map designed to give Republicans one additional seat.

Ohio: While the redistricting effort in the Buckeye State wasn’t as brazen as it was elsewhere, Ohio’s new map diluted two Democratic-held districts, creating GOP pickup opportunities.

Utah: A state court approved a new map that will likely give Democrats one additional seat.

Florida: Just this week, Republicans completed the process on a new map designed to give Republicans as many as four additional seats.

Tennessee: Also this week, Republicans approved a new map designed to give Republicans one additional seat, taking advantage of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling.

Louisiana: While the newly redrawn map in the Pelican State hasn’t been formally unveiled, it will reportedly add one additional Republican seat.

Alabama: Republicans are currently moving forward with plans for a map that would give Republicans two more seats.

It’s important to emphasize that some of these maps are currently facing legal challenges, while others are still taking shape. Most of these maps would take effect during this year’s election cycle, but there’s still some uncertainty surrounding the implementation date in some states.

Nevertheless, the Virginia map that enjoyed popular public support was prepared to help mitigate an unprecedented Republican abuse. The state Supreme Court in the commonwealth appears to have removed that option.

After Virginia voters had their say, many GOP officials questioned whether the entire gerrymandering gambit had been a waste of time and effort. In the aftermath of two highly controversial court rulings, Republicans are suddenly feeling a lot better about the whole scheme.

The Dictatorship

Court denies request to immediately block DOJ ‘slush fund’

Published

6 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Court denies request to immediately block DOJ ‘slush fund’

Jun. 10, 2026, 6:14 PM EDT

A federal judge in Washington has denied a bid Wednesday brought by a watchdog group to immediately block the Justice Department’s “anti-weaponization” fund, for now choosing to trust the department’s assertions that it is not moving forward with the fund.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled immediately, denying Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s request for a temporary restraining order that would have blocked the Department of Justice from taking steps to create the fund.

Throughout the 30-minute hearing, the DOJ reiterated that the administration was not moving forward with the nearly $1.8 billion fund, which seeks to compensate individuals who allege they have been politically targeted or victimized by the DOJ.

Andrew Block, the only lawyer present for the government, repeatedly cited Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s June 2 congressional testimonyin which he said the administration was “not moving forward” with plans to create the fund.

Leon indicated he agreed with the DOJ’s position that the case appeared to be moot, saying he was not persuaded there was an issue for the court to decide regarding the creation of the fund. He issued a stern warning to the DOJ, saying, “Don’t play possum with this court!” — meaning he does not want to be deceived.

The plaintiffs argued Blanche’s testimony did not amount to an official cancellation. Nikhel Sus, CREW’s attorney, said Blanche “refused to memorialize that rescission,” or in other words, put it in writing. Sus said that was “highly unusual.” Leon responded, “This whole case is highly unusual to say the least.”

Leon asked the government twice why they would not just rescind the order that established the fund. Block responded, “I don’t know,” and pointed again to Blanche’s public statements about the fund’s future.

Both Leon and Sus raised the issue of Trump’s continued public defense of the fund. “It can still be an important issue and also not moving forward,” Block said. “That isn’t a direction to move forward with the fund.”

Although Leon rejected CREW’s bid for an immediate block, he indicated he is still considering its request for a longer-term block against the fund.

A block order from a separate federal judge in Virginia remains in effect until at least Friday.

Fallon Gallagher is a legal affairs reporter for MS NOW.

The Dictatorship

Trump is accelerating our Social Security insolvency crisis

Published

6 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jun. 10, 2026, 5:50 PM EDT

The date when Social Security’s trust fund is expected to run out of money just got bumped up. The fund is now projected to empty in 2032according to a new report released by Social Security’s trustees.

The new depletion date isn’t an earth-shaking change — it’s only a quarter earlier than the estimate in last year’s report. But it illustrates how President Donald Trump’s policies are degrading a program he promised to never jeopardize — and accelerating an approaching crisis in how our government will assist the elderly and disabled.

The report names three factors that contributed to the earlier insolvency date. One is a declining fertility rate, but the other two drivers can be traced back to Trump: a drop in immigration into the country, and the “substantial effect” of the tax policies in the One Big Beautiful Bill he signed last summer.

Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities.

Reduced immigration during Trump’s second term — especially when coupled with a declining fertility rate — strains Social Security because the program is funded through payroll taxes. Those come out of people’s paychecks, and fewer workers supporting an aging population means the program receives less revenue. Indeed, Social Security already has been tapping its trust fund for the better part of the past two decades because the program’s costs have exceeded its cash income. And as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out last yearlast year’s tax cuts were a boon to the rich but a bust for the solvency of the Social Security trust fund.

To be clear, if the fund is depleted, Social Security won’t go belly up. Benefits will continue to be paid out, but there will be a large drop in the amount. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that the “average monthly cut would total $500, which is more than what the average retired household spends on groceries each month.”

That would be a huge blow to the budgets of many older Americans. Social Security is a major source of income for most retirees, and roughly 40% of beneficiaries over the age of 65 rely on it for most of their income. And it would mark the destabilization of the sole source of retirement security for most Americans that is supposed to be insulated from ups and downs — unlike 401K plans. As the CBPP has pointed outSocial Security is “most workers’ only source of guaranteed retirement income that is not subject to investment risk or financial market fluctuations.”

Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities. His cuts to the Social Security Administration have left offices understaffedincreased wait timesand reduced quality of customer service.

Ultimately, Trump is exacerbating a colossal social safety net problem that predates him, and the trust fund will hit dire straits after he has left office. Democrats need to have clear plans for shoring up the program and making it robust for the future — which will require not being sheepish about taxes as a tool for renewing the social contract. And when Republicans try to claim that they, too, are champions of Social Security, all Democrats need to do is point to the truth.

Zeeshan Aleem is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He primarily writes about politics and foreign policy.

The Dictatorship

Wednesday’s Mini-Report, 6.10.26

Published

6 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* The latest from Northern Ireland: “The family of a man who lost an eye in a knife attack appealed for calm on Wednesday after the incident triggered a wave of anti-immigrant violence in Belfast overnight, with masked men burning families out of their homes and torching vehicles. The appeal ‌came as a Sudanese man appeared in court charged with attempted murder and as British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and politicians in Northern Ireland condemned the violence by ‘masked thugs’ that had targeted ethnic minorities.”

* In related news: “The British government hit out at X owner Elon Musk Wednesday, accusing him of whipping up tensions online ahead of disorder in Belfast.”

* The tenuous state of a dubious ceasefire: “Trump said the U.S. is going to hit Iran ‘hard’ today when pressed by reporters in the Oval Office about his statement earlier that Tehran will ‘pay the price’ for taking ‘too long’ to reach a peace agreement. ‘Well, we’re going to be attacking them and attacking them very hard, resuming bombing,’ he said.”

* The latest casualty figures from Lebanon: “Israel’s military offensive in Lebanon has killed at least 3,666 people, including 131 healthcare workers, and injured more than 11,300 since the U.S. and Israel began their war with Iran in late February, the Lebanese health ministry reported yesterday.”

* The changing nature of modern warfare: “Ukraine is wreaking havoc on unarmored trucks and trains in the battlefield’s rear, using drones with upgraded engines and batteries, integrated Starlink communication systems and new artificial-intelligence capabilities. The ramped-up attacks are causing fuel shortages, complicating troop rotations and reducing Russian military activity on the front.”

* This seems like a reasonable request: “Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee demanded Wednesday that Bill Pulte, President Donald Trump’s controversial pick for acting director of national intelligence, submit to a full security check before assuming the post, including an examination of his financial holdings and foreign contacts.”

* Some market trends can’t be stopped despite the White House’s best efforts: “Even as President Donald Trump boosts coal over clean energy, solar power is hitting new milestones in the U.S. and remains the leading source of new power. Data released Wednesday by global energy think tank Ember, along with a report by the Solar Energy Industries Association and analytics firm Wood Mackenzie, show the continued growth of solar and decline of coal in the United States despite federal policy. In May, for the first time, solar supplied more of the nation’s electricity than coal, or 12.8%, Ember said.”

* A bizarre schedule for a nonemergency vanity project: “Federal officials are laying more groundwork to begin construction on President Donald Trump’s planned 250-foot-tall triumphal arch, sharing additional documents that detail the project’s scope and an aggressive timetable for potentially completing work before Trump’s term ends. According to National Park Service documents posted this month, the administration envisions 20 hours per day of construction on the arch, year-round, in hopes of completing the project within two to three years.”

See you tomorrow.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”