{"id":27047,"date":"2025-12-17T09:48:16","date_gmt":"2025-12-17T09:48:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cndailynews.store\/?p=27047"},"modified":"2025-12-17T09:48:18","modified_gmt":"2025-12-17T09:48:18","slug":"court-to-hear-arguments-in-lawsuit-over-californias-prop-50","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cndailynews.store\/?p=27047","title":{"rendered":"Court to Hear Arguments In Lawsuit Over California\u2019s Prop 50"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\"\"
\u00a0Getty Images<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

This article may contain commentary
\nwhich reflects the author’s opinion.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

A federal lawsuit challenging California\u2019s congressional redistricting began Monday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.\u00a0The case is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, with Judge Josephine L. Staton presiding,\u00a0the Center Square reported<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/div>\n

The lawsuit challenges Proposition 50, a ballot measure approved by California voters in the Nov. 4 election. The U.S. Department of Justice is among the plaintiffs contesting the measure, which altered the state\u2019s redistricting process and could allow Democrats to gain up to five additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2026 midterm elections.<\/p>\n

Proposition 50 was enacted after Texas pursued its own mid-decade redistricting, a move that similarly positioned Republicans in that state to potentially add five House seats. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of the new district boundaries.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\u201cWe want our day in court to make sure we\u2019re making all of our arguments and the people are heard,\u201d Assemblymember David Tangipa, R-Fresno, previously told The Center Square.<\/p>\n

\u201cUnder the [Voting Rights Act], there are very clear standards,\u201d said Tangipa, one of the plaintiffs in the suit. \u201cI do believe the state of California did not follow those standards.\u201d<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/div>\n

Last month, a federal court temporarily blocked Texas\u2019 mid-decade redistricting plan, finding that the Republican-led legislature likely violated federal voting rights laws by redrawing districts in a way that discriminated against voters of color, according to previous reporting by The Center Square. California Democrats, who advanced Proposition 50 through a special election on Nov. 4, have faced similar allegations, the outlet reported.<\/p>\n

\n

Advertisement<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

However, the U.S. Supreme Court later allowed Texas\u2019 new congressional maps to take effect. In a 6\u20133 decision, the justices said the state was likely to prevail on the merits and criticized lower courts for what they described as significant legal errors in blocking the maps.<\/p>\n

In light of the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling in the Texas case, it remains unclear how courts will ultimately rule on the legal challenge to Proposition 50.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn letting Texas use its gerrymandered maps, the Supreme Court noted that California\u2019s maps, like Texas\u2019s, were drawn for lawful reasons,\u201d Brandon Richards, deputy director for rapid response for the governor\u2019s office, told the Center Square. \u201cThat should be the beginning and the end of this Republican effort to silence the voters of California.\u201d<\/p>\n

Reports noted in October that the effort to pass Prop 50 was\u00a0one of the most expensive<\/a>\u00a0in California history.<\/p>\n

The campaigns for and against Gov. Gavin Newsom\u2019s Proposition 50 have raised more than $215 million as of October 2, including over $100 million in September alone \u2014 making it the third most expensive ballot measure in California over the past decade.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Only Proposition 22 in 2020, which sought to redefine the employment status of rideshare drivers, and Proposition 27 in 2022, which aimed to legalize online gambling, have drawn higher campaign spending, CalMatters reports.<\/p>\n

The campaign in support of Proposition 50, led by Governor Gavin Newsom, has raised more than $138 million, according to state filings. Roughly $49 million, or about 40% of that total, came from small donors contributing less than $100 each, with most of those contributions reported by the House Majority PAC.<\/p>\n

Five major donors collectively contributed just over $25 million to the effort, CalMatters noted. Per the outlet, they are:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • $10 million:<\/strong>\u00a0House Majority PAC, a SuperPAC focused on electing Democrats to Congress;<\/li>\n
  • $10 million:<\/strong>\u00a0George Soros\u2019 Fund for Policy Reform, which focuses on drug policy and electoral reform, according to\u00a0IRS filings;<\/li>\n
  • $6.9 million<\/strong>:\u00a0MoveOn.org, a liberal grassroots organization;<\/li>\n
  • $3 million:<\/strong>\u00a0The California Teachers Association, a powerful union with close ties to Democrats;<\/li>\n
  • $3 million:<\/strong>\u00a0The National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the country that\u00a0gives overwhelmingly to Democrats.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Newsom also transferred $2.6 million from his 2022 reelection campaign to support the \u201cYes\u201d effort. According to a CalMatters analysis of data from the California Secretary of State, more than 68,000 individual contributors have donated to the campaign, the outlet reported.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n