Redistricting Laws Voting Rights Act Redistricting Gerrymandering Election Integrity Electoral Law Election Law Legal Challenges Electoral Processes Electoral Legislation Racial Gerrymandering Citizenship Redistricting Law Supreme Court Judicial Decisions Electoral Districts Legislative Procedures Election Laws Litigation Election Regulations Amendments Racial Discrimination Equal Protection Electoral Regulations Electoral Integrity Electoral Process Election Procedures Civil Rights Disenfranchisement Referendum Legislation Ballot Initiatives Political Representation Census Legislation Referendums Prisoners' Rights Legislative Actions Equal Protection Clause Article 326 Legislation Voter ID Laws First Amendment Electoral College Redistricting Reform Ballot Measures Adult Suffrage Electoral Maps Federal Regulations Gerrymandering Laws Citizenship Requirements Federalism State Authority Discrimination Democracy Executive Orders Supreme Court Justices Electoral Manipulation Electoral Laws Redistricting Controversies Voting Legislation Electoral Fairness Quorum Breaking Gerrymandering Legality Census Issues Census Regulations Partisan Politics Partisan Gerrymandering Legislative Authority State Powers Federal Court Cases Universal Adult Franchise Mail-in Voting Secrecy in Voting Federal Court Decisions Ethnic Minority Representation Mail-in Ballots Federal Voting Rights Act Initiative Petitions Representation Supreme Court Decisions Election Commission Race-Based Remedies Legislative Process Proposition 50 Aadhaar Direct Democracy Parliamentary Procedures Legal Precedents State Preemption Legal Framework Citizenship Definition Felon Disenfranchisement State Legislation National Voter Registration Act State vs. Federal Law Ballot Language Citizen Initiatives Petition Validity Election Monitoring Felon Reenfranchisement Abortion Legislation
The unsigned decision keeps California’s voter‑approved lines in place during ongoing litigation, tightening a mid‑decade redistricting contest that could tip the U.S. House.
