American Voter Project: Redistricting and the 2026 Midterm Elections

Summary

The panel examined how recent redistricting battles could affect the 2026 midterm elections and the future of voting rights.

The Supreme Court and the Voting Rights Act

Marc Elias argued that the Supreme Court’s 2026 decision in Louisiana v. Callais effectively gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. He said the ruling undermined Congress’s authority to protect minority voters and could encourage states to weaken Black representation.

Ari Berman described how Louisiana, Alabama, and Tennessee moved to redraw districts after the decision, eliminating majority-Black districts. The speakers also criticized what they saw as an unequal response to requests for relief: Black voters’ claims were delayed, while white voters’ claims received faster consideration.

Mid-decade redistricting and the 2026 election

Berman said President Trump’s push for Republican-leaning maps in Texas prompted a broader wave of mid-decade redistricting in Republican-controlled states. Democratic-led states responded in different ways, including California’s temporary, voter-approved map and legal challenges that helped reverse Republican efforts in Utah and Missouri.

The panel discussed a theoretical net gain of nine Republican seats but questioned whether those gains would translate into election results. They pointed to the national political climate, candidate strength, and public backlash as factors that could limit Republicans’ advantage.

Fairness, competition, and political strategy

The panel debated whether Democrats’ earlier restrictions on partisan gerrymandering left them unable to respond effectively to Republican map changes. Eric Holder and Elias argued that Democrats should not simply accept one-sided redistricting. Elias said voters who oppose partisan gerrymandering should elect Democrats who will pursue a federal ban.

Berman also warned that gerrymandering by either party can reduce competition, discourage turnout, and weaken voters’ sense that their choices matter.

Technology and repeated map changes

Elias and Holder said modern computing makes it possible to draw maps using detailed information about voters and their likely behavior. They warned that frequent redistricting can let politicians choose their voters rather than voters choose their representatives.

The panel discussed federal legislation to prohibit partisan gerrymandering and mid-cycle redraws, while noting that political opposition and the Senate filibuster could make reform difficult.

Courts, Congress, and state-level remedies

The speakers argued that Congress should play a stronger role in protecting voting rights. Elias said Congress has clear authority to ban partisan gerrymandering.

They also discussed state voting-rights laws and state constitutional claims as possible avenues for challenges, while warning that the Supreme Court could scrutinize those protections too. Several speakers said court rulings shape not only the law but also public expectations about what is acceptable.

Election administration and public engagement

Berman and Elias urged attention to what happens after voting, including ballot counting, certification, and the period immediately after polls close. They expressed concern about election-denying officials and efforts to challenge voter eligibility. Elias said the period when results are still unclear is especially vulnerable to confusion or interference.

The speakers emphasized public organizing as a way to resist voting restrictions and political manipulation. In closing, Holder connected voting rights to broader struggles over race, gender, and inclusion, and argued that young people have a responsibility to defend democracy. Columbia Votes representatives encouraged students to register, make a voting plan, and remain engaged beyond Election Day.

Presenters and Contributors

• Bernard E. Harcourt — moderator
• Eric H. Holder Jr. — panelist
• Ari Berman — panelist
• Marc Elias — panelist
• Devin — Columbia Votes representative; surname unclear in the subtitles
• Zoe — Columbia Votes representative; surname unclear in the subtitles

Deborah Archer was expected to participate but could not attend.