Hansi Lo Wang

In California, a panel of federal judges is set to rule soon on whether to block a congressional map that could help Democrats pick up five more U.S.

House seats.

California voters approved that map to counter the new Texas map that President Trump pushed for to help Republicans.

A New York lawsuit filed by a Democratic law firm is trying to force that state's congressional map to be redrawn.

A state judge is set to decide soon whether to throw out that case.

Missouri's Republican-friendly map is still facing lawsuits and a referendum effort.

Plus, another wave of congressional gerrymandering may be coming, depending on what and when the Supreme Court decides in a Louisiana case.

Many legal experts are expecting the court's decision to weaken the Voting Rights Act's protections against racial discrimination in redistricting.

Anzila Wong, NPR News.

Good morning, Steve.

Well, this was a three-judge panel that the majority ruling written by a judge nominated by President Trump.

The Supreme Court has put a pause on this order.

And this order by the lower court found that this congressional map Texas passed back in August is likely unconstitutional because it discriminates against voters based on race.

This lower court ruling cited a letter that the Justice Department wrote to Texas officials and multiple public statements by key Republican state lawmakers involved in developing the map.

And I'll suggest Texas lawmakers pass this map to eliminate existing districts in Texas where black and Latino voters together make up the majority.

Well, a majority of conservative justices on the Supreme Court basically sided with Texas state lawmakers who have said they were not motivated by race and were driven instead to draw new districts that are more likely to elect Republicans.

The court's majority wrote that the lower court ruling, quote, failed to honor the presumption of legislative good faith.

And the majority also said the lower court, quote, improperly inserted itself into Texas's primary campaign by releasing its ruling last month in the middle of the candidate filing period.

Yes, the court's three liberal justices dissented.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote their dissenting opinion.