proxy

The potential redrawing of California’s congressional district lines could upend the balance of power in Washington, D.C., in next year’s midterm congressional election. The unusual and unexpected redistricting may take place in coming months because of sparring among President Trump, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Redrawing these maps — known as redistricting — is an esoteric practice that many voters tune out, but one that has an outsized impact on political power and policy in the United States.

Here is a breakdown about why a process that typically occurs once every decade is currently receiving so much attention — and the potential ramifications.

What is redistricting?

There are 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, each of whom is supposed to represent roughly the same number of constituents. Every decade, after the U.S. Census counts the population across the nation, the allocation of congressional representatives for each state can change. For example, after the 2020 census, California’s share of congressional districts was reduced by one for the first time in state history.

After the decennial census, states redraw district lines for congressional and legislative districts based on population shifts, protections for minority voters required by the federal Voting Rights Act and other factors. For much of the nation’s history, such maps were created by state legislators and moneyed interests in smoke-filled backrooms.

Many districts were grossly gerrymandered — contorted — to benefit political parties and incumbents, such as California’s infamous “Ribbon of Shame,” a congressional district that stretched in a reed-thin line 200 miles along the California coast from Oxnard to the Monterey County line.

But in recent decades, political-reform organizations and some elected officials, notably former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, called for independent drawing of district lines. In 2010, the state’s voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure requiring California congressional maps to be drawn by a bipartisan commission, which it did in 2011 and 2021.

Why are we talking about this?

President Trump recently urged Texas lawmakers to redraw its congressional districts to increase the number of GOP members of the House in next year’s midterm election. Congress is closely divided, and the party that does not control the White House traditionally loses seats in the body two years after the presidential election.

Trump has been able to enact his agenda — from deporting undocumented immigrants to extending tax breaks that largely benefit the wealthy to closing some Planned Parenthood clinics — because the GOP controls the White House, the Senate and the House. But if Democrats flip Congress, Trump’s agenda will likely be stymied and he faces the prospect of being a lame duck during his last two years in office.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, shown with Democratic lawmakers from Texas, speaks during a news conference in Sacramento on Friday.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

What is Texas doing?

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called his state’s Legislature into special session last week to discuss the disastrous floods that killed more than 130 people as well as redistricting before the 2026 election.

Trump and his administration urged Abbott to redraw his state’s congressional lines with the hope of picking up five seats.

Abbott has said that his decision to include redistricting in the special session was prompted by a court decision last year that said the state no longer has to draw “coalition districts” that are made up of multiple minority communities. New district lines would give Texans greater opportunity to vote for politicians who best represent them, the governor said in interviews.

Democrats in the Lone Star state’s Legislature met with Newsom in Sacramento on Friday to discuss the ramifications of mid-decade redistricting and accused Trump of trying to rig next year’s midterm election to hold onto power.

Republicans “play by a different set of rules and we could sit back and act as if we have some moral authority and watch this 249-, 250-year-old experiment be washed away,” Newsom said of the nation’s history. “We are not going to allow that to happen.”

Democratic lawmakers in Texas have previously fled the state to not allow the Legislature to have a quorum, such as in 2021 during a battle over voting rights. But with the deadly flooding, this is an unlikely prospect this year.

Why is California in the mix?

The Golden State’s congressional districts are drawn by an independent commission focused on logical geography, shared interests, representation for minority communities and other facets.

If the state reverts to partisan map drawing, redistricting experts on both sides of the aisle agree that several GOP incumbents in the 52-member delegation would be vulnerable, either because of more Democratic voters being placed in their districts, or being forced into face-offs with fellow Republican members of Congress. There are currently nine Republican members of the delegation, a number that could shrink to three or four, according to political statisticians.

Strange bedfellows

These dizzying developments have created agreement among rivals while dividing former allies.

Sara Sadhwani, a member of the 2021 redistricting commission and longtime supporter of independent map drawing, said she supports Democratic efforts to change California’s congressional districts before the midterm election.

“I stand by the work of the commission of course. We drew fair and competitive maps that fully abided by federal laws around the Voting Rights Act to ensure communities of color have an equal opportunity at the ballot box,” said Sadhwani, a politics professor at Pomona College. “That being said, especially when it comes to Congress, most certainly California playing fair puts Democrats at a disadvantage nationally.”

She said the best policy would be for all 50 states to embrace independent redistricting. But in the meantime, she supports Democratic efforts in California to temporarily redraw the districts given the stakes.

“I think it’s patriotic to fight against what appears to be our democracy falling into what appears to be authoritarian rule,” Sadhwani said.

Charles Munger Jr., the son of a late billionaire who was Warren Buffet’s right-hand man, spent more than $12 million to support the ballot measure that created the independent redistricting commission and is invested in making sure that it is not weakened.

“He’s very much committed to making sure the commission is preserved,” said someone close to Munger who requested anonymity to speak candidly. Munger believes “this is ultimately political quicksand and a redistricting war at the end of day is a loss to American voters.”

Munger, who was the state GOP’s biggest donor at one point, is actively involved in the California fight and is researching other efforts to fight gerrymandering nationwide, this person said.

The state Democratic and Republican parties, which rarely agree on anything, agreed in 2010 when they opposed the ballot measure. Now, Democrats, who would likely gain seats if the districts are redrawn by state lawmakers, support a mid-decade redistricting, while the state GOP, which would likely lose seats, says the state should continue having lines drawn by the independent commission once every decade.

“It’s a shame that Governor Newsom and the radical Left in Sacramento are willing to spend $200 million on a statewide special election, while running a deficit of $20 billion, in order to silence the opposition in our state,” the GOP congressional delegation said in a statement on Friday. “As a Delegation we will fight any attempt to disenfranchise California voters by whatever means necessary to ensure the will of the people continues to be reflected in redistricting and in our elections.”

What happens next?

If Democrats in California move forward with their proposal, which is dependent on what Texas lawmakers do during their special legislative session that began last week, they have two options:

• State lawmakers could vote to put the measure before voters in a special election that would likely be held in November — a costly prospect. The last statewide special election — the unsuccessful effort to recall Newsom in 2021 — cost more than $200 million, according to the secretary of state’s office.
• The Legislature could also vote to redraw the maps, but this option would likely be more vulnerable to legal challenge.

Either scenario is expected to be voted on as an urgency item, which requires a 2/3 vote but would insulate the action from being the subject of a referendum later put in front of voters that would delay enactment.

The Legislature is out of session until mid-August.

Times staff writer Taryn Luna in Sacramento contributed to this report.

In the recent weeks there are various reports that mention the recent advances made by Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) against Paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). During the last two years, Sudan was in news headlines for its ongoing brutal civil war. While there are various institutional and ethnic dimensions to the ongoing civil war, it is important to observe that the role of many foreign players in the wider region and their cold geopolitical calculations are adding to the complexities and destructiveness of the ongoing conflict. The various foreign players that are taking part in the ongoing conflict in Sudan include the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates. Their intertwined interests as well as clashes add to the complex geopolitics of the wider region.

Sudan’s role in the Iranian Axis of Resistance

Located at the crossroads of Arab-Islamic civilizations and Africa, Sudan shares a long border with Egypt and a long coast across the Red Sea. This geography is used by Iranian arm smuggling networks to smuggle arms and ammunition to Gaza. Iranian arms supplies, which reach Sudan through the Red Sea, are transferred by land via Sudan and Egypt and from there through Byzantine tunnel networks of Hamas to Gaza. In the list of ‘axis of resistance’ involving “3H” (Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis), Hamas remains an ideological and close ally of the Islamic Republic, and it is evident from the nature of aid, including arms and ammunition, including guns, missiles, and rockets, of Hamas, which shows the deep role of Iran. While the Gaza Strip shares a border with Israel, which is under heavy surveillance across land and sea borders, its border with Egypt remains a soft spot for Iran to smuggle arms and ammunition to the militant group. In this network of arms transfer lies the indirect role of Sudan. Iran’s long-standing relations with regimes in Sudan that are Islamist in orientation, like Al-Bashir, allowed this to flourish. Thus, Sudan under Al Bashir was an unofficial de facto link of the Iranian Axis of Resistance in the wider region. While the Bashir regime took a change in sides during the 2015 war in Yemen, the geographical importance of Sudan as a link to the wider Axis of Resistance remained. In 2009, Israel even bombed such a convoy in Sudan, and this shows how Sudan forms a wider part of the ongoing Iranian-Israeli proxy war.

Israel’s interests in the region

Since its independence in 1956, Sudan has always strongly identified itself closely with the wider Arab-Islamic cause, and this has made various Sudanese governments firm supporters of the Palestinian cause. Since its formation, Israel was always in search of partners, preferably non-Arab or non-Islamic. Situated in the heart of the hostile Arab world, Israel had an “Alliance of the Periphery,” which made overt and covert relationships with various non-Arab and non-Islamic regimes and groups across the region. While Khartoum remained a firm supporter of the Arab cause during both Sudanese civil wars, Israeli “Peripheral Alliance” policy manifested in Israeli aid to non-Arab, non-Muslim Southern Sudanese rebels who were waging war against Khartoum. Since 2011, when South Sudan gained its independence , it has resulted in the establishment of relations between Israel and South Sudan. The antipathy towards the Islamist Khartoum regime made Israeli-South Sudan relations strong. Since the independence of South Sudan in 2011 , Israel’s relationship with the regime in Juba has remained strong. It was seen in Israeli assistance to Juba in the Heglig crisis in 2013 and Israeli support to the regime of Salva Kirr in the following South Sudanese Civil War. As the youngest country in the world, Israeli investments in South Sudan are across various sectors like agriculture, infrastructure, and security relations. As an immediate neighbor of Sudan, South Sudan is strategically important to Israel, and it is related to Israel’s wider security perception across both Sudans.

United Arab Emirates in the region

The history of UAE-Sudanese relations can be traced to many decades, and throughout the period, the UAE has developed deep stakes in the economy of Sudan. UAE investments in the Sudanese agriculture and gold mining sector are huge. The relations deepened as the UAE enrolled mercenaries from the RSF into its Yemen war in 2015. The relations between Emirates and paramilitary leader Hemeti deepened, which is evident from Sudanese illegal gold exports to the UAE. During the onset of civil war, the UAE took a stand to assist the RSF, which was accused of various atrocities like genocide and other war crimes. The UAE’s interest in South Sudan has also grown and is evident from its US$ 13 billion investment in South Sudan. In totality, both Sudan(s) hold billions of dollars worth of UAE investment across various sectors like energy, agriculture, and gold, as well as its dependence on mercenaries from Sudan. This makes the UAE an important player in the political economy of both of these countries. The United Arab Emirates is now stepping up its role in Africa as an investor. This is also underlined by its intervention in supporting various non-state actors across regions like Libya, Somalia, and now Sudan to protect its various business and strategic interests. 

How the Iran-Israel-UAE proxy war is shaping the geopolitics of the region

For the last three years, Sudan has been facing a civil war between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by General Burhan. The rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) is led by Muhammed Hamdan Dagolo (Hemeti). While the SAF consists of many members and sympathizers of earlier regimes that are Islamist in political orientation. Throughout the civil war, the SAF has received aid from countries such as Iran and Türkiye. Iranian assistance is manifested by the transfer of arms and ammunition, including military drones. Iran’s interests in Sudan include the survival of the SAF as well as acquiring ports in the Red Sea. With the fluidity of alliances, there are reports that Israel is aiding rival RSF through the sale of arms and other assistance. Geopolitical pragmatism had made Israel assist an “Alliance of Periphery 2.0” in the region, which included actors such as RSF and South Sudan, as a counter to the Iranian “Axis of Resistance.” In their public statements, RSF has removed its anti-Israeli stance and even sympathized with Israel during the war in Gaza in an indirect manner. In its public statements, RSF has condemned the “Islamist elements” in SAF. Another major supporter of RSF is the UAE. This is evident from the massive assistance provided by the UAE to the RSF through countries like Chad. Recent reports showing the support of the South Sudanese regime for the RSF using its territories underscore this. This is evident from the reports of UAE-constructed airstrips in South Sudan, which provide logistics to the RSF. This could be interpreted as an unofficial alliance between the UAE, Israel, South Sudan, and the RSF to thwart the success of the SAF-led regime. While there are reports of SAF successes in the recent weeks, RSF, despite being beaten down, is land-linked, not landlocked, with various countries like Chad, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic, which act as sources of fortune-searching mercenaries as well as piles of arms and ammunition.

Conclusion

While war is continuing in Sudan and tensions are brewing in South Sudan, it is pertinent to understand that these wars are connected and each country aids rebels in the other. While these porous borders and instability are used by various outside actors to foment ongoing instability. The major factors that keep on inflaming the third Sudanese civil war are the West Asian proxy war, as explained in previous paragraphs, and how regional countries like Chad and South Sudan become launching pads for foreign interests in the wider region. It is pertinent to end hostilities and to create conditions for the return of millions of uprooted people and to start efforts for reconciliation and reconstruction.