Maryland voters will get to decide in November on a congressional redistricting amendment being pushed by Democrats as part of nationwide battle for control of the U.S. House in future elections.
The Maryland Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the proposed constitutional amendment must be placed on the November ballot, reversing two lower court rulings that had blocked it from going to voters. But the court directed the ballot summary to be rewritten.
The decision marks a notable victory for Democrats, who are trying to counter a Republican redistricting movement pushed by President Donald Trump.
Democrats already hold seven of Maryland’s eight U.S. House seats. The proposed amendment would not change voting districts for the midterm elections. But if approved by voters, it could free Democratic lawmakers to draw new congressional districts that give the party a shot at a clean sweep in the 2028 elections.
Democratic Gov. Wes Moore called lawmakers into a special session in August to refer the amendment to the November ballot.
The amendment would undo the foundation of a 2022 court ruling that struck down a previous Democratic redistricting plan as a “product of extreme partisan gerrymandering.” That judge said a constitutional provision requiring compact districts that respect “natural boundaries” applied to congressional districts. But the proposed amendment would apply those parameters only to state legislative districts.
That could allow lawmakers to draw congressional districts that cross the Chesapeake Bay, potentially reshaping a district held by U.S. Rep. Andy Harris, the state’s only Republican representative and the chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus.
Lower courts ruled that lawmakers didn’t abide by their own requirements when referring the amendment to the ballot.
At the heart of the case was a law passed earlier this year that set a July 1 deadline for the secretary of state to certify information about statewide ballot questions to the Maryland State Board of Elections. The same law also set a 15-day public comment period.
Those deadlines had already passed by the time lawmakers approved the redistricting amendment on Aug. 4.
Lawyers for Democratic Attorney General Anthony Brown argued that those deadlines didn’t matter. They said that law didn’t apply to the redistricting amendment because lawmakers wrote their own ballot summary for it, using their constitutional authority. The state Supreme Court ultimately agreed.
Republican lawmakers who sued had won in lower courts on claims that the ballot question wording was misleading and that the amendment violated a single-issue requirement in the state constitution by including a provision giving original jurisdiction over congressional redistricting lawsuits to the state Supreme Court.
The state Supreme Court rejected the multiple-subject argument but concurred that the ballot wording was misleading. However, the court said that wasn't enough to prevent the amendment from going to the people. It instead directed a change to be made to the ballot wording that voters will see.
Redistricting typically happens near the beginning of each decade, after new census data is released. But a mid-decade redistricting battle broke out last year after Trump urged Republican-led states to redraw congressional districts in the hopes that it might help Republicans hold onto a slim House majority in this year’s midterm elections.
Republicans hope to win as many as 16 additional seats this year from new U.S. House districts enacted in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee and Texas. Democrats hope to gain as many as five congressional seats from new districts in California and Utah.
In May, the Virginia Supreme Court struck down a redistricting effort that could have helped Democrats win up to four additional seats. It ruled that the Democratic-led legislature violated procedural requirements when placing an amendment on the ballot.
