Democrats in Texas are currently accusing Republicans of using redistricting to gain a partisan advantage. This accusation, however, is both disingenuous and historically inaccurate.
When Democrats controlled the state in the 1990s, they engaged in the same tactics—so aggressively that the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately ruled their districts racially gerrymandered and unconstitutional.
In 1990, Democrat Ann Richards was elected governor of Texas, and the Democratic Party controlled the state legislature. This control allowed them to redraw congressional districts to maintain their political dominance.
State Senator Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Democrat, chaired the redistricting subcommittee and took charge of drafting the new maps. Her explicit goal was to create new minority-majority districts to favor the Democratic Party.
Johnson’s plan resulted in a majority-Hispanic district in Houston and a majority-Black district in Dallas—both aimed at consolidating long-term Democratic control.
This political maneuvering did not go unnoticed. The newly drawn districts, which included those represented by Democrats Martin Frost and John Wiley Bryant, became more homogeneous and less politically diverse.
Despite protests, the Texas Legislature passed Johnson’s plan in 1991. Critics, primarily Republicans, argued that the maps used flawed census data, potentially undercounting minority populations.
Yet, the U.S. Department of Justice granted preclearance under the Voting Rights Act, and the new districts were used in the 1992 elections.
In 1994, Republicans filed a lawsuit, claiming that several new districts—particularly Districts 18, 29, and 30—were racially gerrymandered in violation of the Constitution.
Hellbound and Down 