Steve Cox, left, and Steve Miller sign forms for legislators during a pro-redistricting event on Nov. 18, 2025 at the Indiana Statehouse.

WASHINGTON – At President Donald Trump's urging, Texas is trying to send even more Republicans to represent it in the U.S. Congress.

To pull that off, the country's most populous Republican state is going to need the U.S. Supreme Court to take its side in a dispute that has fast evolved to include more than a half-dozen other states that are also seeking to change who voters can vote for when they pick their representatives in the 2026 mid-term elections.

The clock is ticking for the justices to act before an important Dec. 8 deadline for any Texas congressional candidates to declare what House race they're hoping to compete in next November. Nationwide, the stakes are high for both the GOP and Democrats because a change in control of just a few seats could tip the balance of power inside the House during Trump's final two years in the White House. Republicans hold a narrow 219 to 213 majority.

What's unusual about this Supreme Court case is that states usually review their congressional maps after counting the population in the once-a-decade U.S. census. But the flurry of states like Texas that are conducting mid-decade redistricting is one of the biggest such undertakings since the 1800s, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Here is what you need to know about where redistricting stands in states nationwide:

Which states are redistricting?

Six states have already adopted new congressional maps: California, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Utah.

In addition, Virginia Democrats are edging toward redistricting in Richmond, while GOP leaders in the Florida state legislature are gearing up for action in December. Pressure is also building on Democratic leaders in Maryland. Four other states might take steps depending on how courts respond: Alabama, Louisiana, New York and North Dakota.

Combined, the range of potential changes for the 2026 election is great enough that political observers find it difficult to gauge which party has the upper hand in a campaign where the president's party has historically not performed well.

"The story of the race for the House has been dominated by mid-cycle redistricting to such a degree that it has been challenging to assess the overall state of play, with new developments popping up almost daily," said Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

What happened with Texas?

The Texas legislature, led by Republicans, adopted an electoral map in August that could flip as many as five seats held by Democrats to Republicans.

Federal courts last week blocked the map. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, a Trump appointee, ruled that "what ultimately spurred" Texas to redraw its boundaries was a letter from the Department of Justice urging state officials to "inject racial considerations into what Texas insists was a race-blind process."

"The letter instead commands Texas to change four districts for one reason and one reason alone: the racial demographics of the voters who live there," Brown wrote.

Justice Samuel Alito put those decisions on hold temporarily – and left the new map in place – while the Supreme Court considers the case.

The case is urgent because the Texas filing deadline for 2026 candidates is Dec. 8.

What happened in California?

In response to the GOP redistricting in Texas, Democrats in California, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, redrew their state map to flip as many as five seats now held by Republicans.

California voters on Nov. 4 passed Proposition 50, a constitutional amendment that allowed for redistricting. The Trump administration is challenging the move in court.

"After poking the bear, this bear roared," Newsom said of the ballot initiative.

Supreme Court found partisan gerrymandering 'beyond the reach' of courts

Federal courts have grappled with gerrymandering – the redrawing of political maps for the benefit of one side – for decades. The crux of the legal challenges has shifted from partisan disputes to racial allegations.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that courts can’t rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering because the Constitution gives state legislatures and Congress the authority to determine electoral maps.

"We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the 5-4 majority.

But legal challenges are still possible for allegations of racial discrimination.

"In two areas − one-person, one-vote and racial gerrymandering − our cases have held that there is a role for the courts with respect to at least some issues that could arise from a State’s drawing of congressional districts," Roberts wrote.

What's happening in other states?

Redistricting battles are being waged in states beyond Texas, the most populous Republican state, and California, the most populous Democratic state. Here is a summary of where things stand from the National Conference of State Legislatures:

Missouri enacted new maps on Sept. 28.

North Carolina enacted new maps on Oct. 22.

Ohio adopted new maps on Oct. 31.

Utah adopted new maps via court order on Nov. 10.

Virginia’s legislature passed an amendment Oct. 31 authorizing redistricting, but lawmakers would have to act during the 2026 session to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot.

Indiana Gov. Mike Braun voiced interest in redistricting, but legislative leaders say there aren’t enough votes yet to support the move.

Florida’s state House created a committee on redistricting in August, but lawmakers haven’t proposed a new map yet.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore revived a redistricting advisory committee to recommend new maps.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Will the Supreme Court take sides in the big Texas redistricting fight?

Reporting by Bart Jansen, USA TODAY / USA TODAY

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect