Political manipulation of voting district boundaries is intensifying throughout the United States, continuing a practice that has shaped American elections for more than two centuries.
The term “gerrymander” originated in America over 200 years ago, describing the controversial practice of redrawing legislative district lines for political benefit. This concept has endured because American political competition remains intense, and advancing technology has made politicians increasingly skilled at creating districts that favor their own parties.
Most states assign redistricting responsibilities to their legislatures, with governors holding approval or veto power over the final maps. These boundaries must be redrawn following each decade’s census to ensure equal voter representation across districts.
However, several states allow more frequent redistricting beyond the required decennial updates.
To combat gerrymandering, some states have established independent citizen commissions or bipartisan political panels to handle the redistricting process.
When one political party dominates both the legislature and governor’s mansion — or holds sufficient legislative seats to override vetoes — they can essentially design districts to maximize their electoral advantages.
Politicians typically employ two main gerrymandering strategies: spreading opposition voters across multiple districts to weaken their influence, or concentrating opposing party supporters into fewer districts to secure victories in the remaining areas.
This practice traces back to 1812, when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry approved legislation redrawing state Senate boundaries to help the Democratic-Republican Party. Critics noted that one strangely shaped district resembled a salamander, prompting a newspaper to label it “The Gerry-mander” — creating the term we use today for politically motivated district drawing. Despite losing his gubernatorial reelection bid in 1812, Gerry successfully won the vice presidency under President James Madison that same year.
The U.S. Constitution does not prohibit this practice.
In 2019, the Supreme Court determined that federal courts lack jurisdiction over partisan gerrymandering disputes in a case stemming from North Carolina. Chief Justice John Roberts explained the ruling by stating: “The Constitution supplies no objective measure for assessing whether a districting map treats a political party fairly.”
The Court emphasized that state courts could still address partisan gerrymandering under their own state constitutions and legal frameworks. However, some state courts, including North Carolina’s Supreme Court, have also declared they cannot rule on partisan redistricting disputes.
The motivation for gerrymandering intensifies when political control hangs in the balance. Following the 2024 elections that produced a narrow Republican House majority, President Donald Trump encouraged Texas Republican leaders to redraw congressional maps for additional seats in 2026. California Democrats responded by redesigning their own congressional districts to gain more seats — a strategy approved by California voters. This redistricting activity in America’s two largest states prompted officials in other states to similarly redraw House districts for partisan advantage.
Political scientists and statisticians have created various methods to measure the partisan benefits potentially gained through gerrymandering.
Republicans, controlling redistricting in more states than Democrats, leveraged 2010 census data to establish significant gerrymandered advantages. An Associated Press examination of that decade’s redistricting revealed Republicans achieved greater political benefits in more states than either party had secured over the previous five decades.
Democrats adopted similar gerrymandering tactics following the 2020 census to counter Republican advantages. AP analysis of 2024 election results indicated significant political bias in congressional districts across one-third of all states, suggesting widespread gerrymandering. Nevertheless, the total House seats won by both Republicans and Democrats nearly matched expectations based on each party’s vote share across all U.S. districts.
