The litigation over Galveston County’s precinct maps – the term Texas law uses for county commissioner, justice of the peace, and constable districts – is closely watched for its implications for voting rights law, in particular the viability of minority coalition claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. In addition, claims of intentional discrimination and racial gerrymandering under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments remain pending in federal court, and separate litigation over a new map the county adopted in June 2026 is proceeding in state court. A summary of the litigation thus far is below.
Galveston County voters cast ballots in the March 2026 primary under one set of district boundaries and will vote in the November general election under a different set, amid a dispute over the County’s district lines. After the 2020 census, the county redrew its four commissioner districts/precincts and eliminated the only district in which Black and Latino voters together formed a majority. The redraw effectively removed the county’s only African American commissioner from the Commissioner Court.
Federal Court
Black and Latino voters, civil rights organizations, and the United States sued, and after a 2023 trial the district court struck down the map as a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. However, the full Fifth Circuit reversed that ruling on August 1, 2024, holding that the Voting Rights Act does not permit vote-dilution claims brought on behalf of coalitions of two or more minority groups, and returned the plaintiffs’ remaining constitutional claims of intentional discrimination and racial gerrymandering to the district court. That coalition claim holding was later invoked in support of the mid-decade congressional redistricting Texas enacted in 2025.
While those claims were pending, the county adopted the 2026 map and asked the district court to dismiss the case as moot, arguing that the 2021 map was no longer in use and a ruling on it would be an advisory opinion. On August 7, 2026, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown denied that request and allowed the claims to proceed. Judge Brown found that the county had made no binding statement that it would not reinstate the 2021 map, that the timing of the new map was suspicious, and that the county continued to defend the 2021 map on its merits at the same hearing where it argued the case was moot. Judge Brown’s August 7 order states that the Commissioners Court’s June 8, 2026 resolution gave three reasons for reexamining the boundaries: compliance with applicable law, the 2020 census results, and “improving partisan performance in favor of Republican candidates.” The order adopting the map, however, cited none of those reasons, saying only that the court determined the change best serves the interests of the county’s residents. The court also noted that the county acknowledged the new map does not alter partisan outcomes in the 2026 general election other than making the commissioner precincts slightly more Republican. Essentially, Brown concluded the county gave him no reason to treat the map switch as permanent, since it never ruled out reinstating the 2021 map and still defended that map as lawful.
State Court
A second, separate challenge targets the 2026 map itself. Three county residents, one of them a sitting constable, represented by the Campaign Legal Center and the UCLA Voting Rights Project, asked the Texas Supreme Court on August 4 to bar the county from using the new boundaries in November, arguing that changing district/precinct lines between the primary and the general election violates the Texas Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, and the Texas Election Code. The county responded that Article V, Section 18 of the Texas Constitution allows commissioners courts to redivide precincts “from time to time” without restriction by election cycle, and that the Election Code contains an express exception for boundary changes made under that provision.
On August 14, the Texas Supreme Court denied the state court petition because the residents had not first sought review in a lower court, and they quickly refiled in the Texas 14th Court of Appeals. On August 20, that court also denied relief, holding that the residents had not shown the county’s legal duty was clear, or that the case presented no disputed facts; the court did not decide whether the map change is lawful. The 2026 map remains in place for the November election, and the federal claims over the 2021 map continue in U.S. district court.
Find us on:
