Federal authorities has entered the fray in a lawsuit brought forward by California Republicans, aiming to block the California's newly approved congressional redistricting map.
This legal action, submitted to a US district court, targets the map supported by the state's Democratic governor, which was created in reaction against a Republican-led gerrymander in Texas.
"California's redistricting scheme constitutes a brazen power grab that violates civil rights and mocks the democratic process," stated the US attorney general.
The Democratic party have expressed confidence that the redistricting plan will withstand legal scrutiny.
"The plaintiffs were defeated in the election and they are likely to also lose in court," commented a representative for the governor.
Constitutional Challenge
The legal challenge asserts that California's map improperly used racial considerations to significantly advantage Hispanic voters in contravention of the US Constitution.
"It is unconstitutional to use race as a proxy to further partisan goals, but that is precisely what the California General Assembly did with the redistricting measure," argued a senior official from the Civil Rights Division.
Broader Implications
This courtroom confrontation represents the major counterpunch by the Democratic party in the ongoing political battle that began in Texas and has spread across multiple states.
In contrast to elsewhere, where GOP-controlled legislatures have implemented partisan maps, California's plan required public consent, which it obtained with approximately two-thirds of the vote.
Wider Consequences
Democrats need to gain just a small number of Republican-held House seats to gain majority of the House of Representatives in next year's congressional elections.
The political group controlling the controlling share will influence the final years of the sitting president's term, deciding if a unified Republican Congress will continue to deliver its political program or face resistance, investigations and possible further challenges.
- Legal counsel for the plaintiffs is being handled by a prominent law firm
- The managing partner currently serves as assistant attorney general
- Nevertheless, this attorney has been removed from this particular case
