At the urging of President Trump, the Texas legislature has launched a mid‑decade redistricting effort aimed at securing additional Republican seats in Congress. If successful, this effort could have far‑reaching implications for representation and governance—and spur other states to try the same. In this episode of Stanford Legal, two of Stanford Law School’s—and the nation’s—leading election law experts sit down to untangle the legal and political stakes of today’s redistricting wars. In their wide‑ranging discussion, Professors Pamela Karlan and Nathaniel Persily shed light on Texas’s push to add five new Republican‑leaning seats, the Supreme Court’s recent decision to re‑argue Louisiana v. Callais—a move that could reshape how the Voting Rights Act is applied—and the broader battles over race, representation, and the future of redistricting in America.
Links:
- Nate Persily >>> Stanford Law page
Connect:
- Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website
- Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page
- Rich Ford >>> Twitter/X
- Pam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School Page
- Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X
- Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X
(00:00) Voting Rights and Gerrymandering
(05:31)The Legal Landscape of Redistricting
(15:01) The Impact of Partisan Gerrymandering
(25:31) The Evolving Role of the Judiciary
(35:01) Future Implications for the Voting Rights Act
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.