Gov. Gavin Newsom said California's redistricting would counter Texas' rare mid-decade redistricting push. That doesn't mean California is turning back after a federal court in Texas blocked the state's recently redrawn congressional map from going into effect for the 2026 midterm elections.

Tuesday's court ruling came weeks after California voters formally approved a ballot measure that was introduced to counteract Texas' redistricting. The California measure originally included trigger language that said the state would only redraw its congressional map in response to a similar move by a Republican-led state, but legislators removed the language before voters went to the polls. 

"Donald Trump and Greg Abbott played with fire, got burned and democracy won," Newsom wrote on X Tuesday following the court ruling. "This ruling is a win for Texas, and for every American who fights for free and fair elections."

Paul Mitchell, whose firm was hired to draw California's congressional districts, posted on social media that the maps will be staying in place. 

"The trigger language was removed in the legislative process as it was clear that TX was redistricting. So, even if their map is invalidated/postponed, the Prop 50 maps stay in place," Mitchell wrote.  

Earlier this year, Texas lawmakers redrew their congressional maps in a rare mid-decade redistricting effort, which kicked off after President Trump pushed for new congressional district boundaries that could help secure five Republican-friendly seats. 

The move set off a redistricting battle across the U.S., with Newsom — a potential 2028 presidential candidate —  leading an effort to neutralize potential Republican gains in Texas by redrawing California's own congressional lines to net up to five seats for Democrats. 

In August, California lawmakers approved several bills to redraw the state's congressional map to potentially make five Republican-held congressional districts more favorable to Democrats. Because the measures required changes to the state's constitution, they had to be put before voters in a special election. 

Earlier this month, California voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 50, setting the stage for newly-drawn congressional maps for the 2026 midterms.

California lawmakers removed trigger clause

When California state lawmakers initially introduced their redistricting legislation, it included a trigger clause under which California would only redraw its congressional map in response to a similar move by a Republican state. 

Under that trigger language, California's redistricting map would "become operative only if Texas, Florida, or another state adopts a new congressional district map that takes effect after Aug. 1, 2025, and before Jan. 1, 2031, and such redistricting is not required by a federal court order."

However, the trigger clause was removed just before California lawmakers voted on the redistricting bills. Without that trigger language, as it stands now, the Texas ruling does not impact California's redrawn map. 

During an August press conference, Newsom was asked if California would move forward with Proposition 50 even if a court were to strike down Texas' maps. 

"We're moving forward," Newsom responded. "Texas moved forward. Texas acted. Texas is moving forward. You're suggesting, people are suggesting. Texas is not going to move forward because of what we just did? Come on."

The Trump administration has sued California over its new congressional lines. A hearing is scheduled for Dec 3. 

Meanwhile, the Trump administration denounced the ruling striking down Texas' maps. Texas on Tuesday afternoon appealed the ruling striking down its maps to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

"We strongly disagree with today's district court ruling on Texas's redistricting map - Texas's map was drawn the right way for the right reasons," Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on X. "We look forward to Texas's victory at the Supreme Court."

According to Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, the ruling invalidating Texas maps would not have an effect on California's redistricting efforts given the facts that were considered by the court. 

"Texas maps were struck down by the court based on how Texas actually drew the lines, and that has very little to do with how California drew their lines," Levitt told CBS News.

In the Texas ruling, in a 2-1 decision, federal judges found "substantial evidence" that "Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 map." The court considered a letter that the Justice Department sent to Texas lawmakers in July stating the state's 2021 map was "unconstitutional" because it included four congressional districts where no ethnic group had an outright majority, concluding that the state must therefore dismantle and redraw its lines. 

The court found this to be a "legally incoherent assertion." 

"California didn't do anything like that," Levitt said. "California drew districts overwhelmingly for partisan reasons and there's actually nothing that the litigants in California have pointed to that indicates that California focused predominantly or excessively based on race." 

The Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on a dispute over Louisiana's congressional map and whether race can be used as a factor when drawing districts. In October, justices appeared poised to weaken a key provision, Section 2, of the Voting Rights Act that has allowed the consideration of race when drawing districts, and has been used to ensure minority voters have the opportunity to elect their preferred candidates. 

This could lead to more redistricting efforts as states eliminate race as a factor for their standing congressional voting lines. 

"It is terribly disturbing that this is where we are at," Texas Democratic state Rep. Ramon Romero told CBS News. "A point where communities that have been so grossly underrepresented for basically our entirety of the history of our country and now that there's growth in opportunity, there's growth in education, there's growth in representation, those wealthy billionaires that are manipulating our country for their benefit have won at the expense of so many families and people of color." 

Romero was among the Texas lawmakers who broke quorum in August by leaving the state in attempts to block the GOP-backed congressional maps. Though he says today's ruling was a victory for Democrats, much remains to be determined after the Supreme Court weighs in. 

The timing of a Supreme Court decision is unknown, but the clock is ticking for Texas. Congressional candidates have until Dec. 8 to file to run for next year's midterm election and appear on the primary ballot set for March.