“You Silly Texas Republicans, Only Leftists Can Racially Gerrymander”

I know that many are upset and flummoxed about the three-judge federal court panel that placed an injunction against the 2025 Texas congressional redistricting map. The panel consisted of Judge Jerry Smith (appointed by Reagan in 1987), Judge Jeffrey Brown (appointed by Trump in 2019), and Judge David Guaderrama (appointed by Obama in 2011). It was a 2–1 decision, with Judge Smith dissenting — and what a dissent it was.

Judge Smith began his dissent with this statement:

“I also need to highlight the pernicious judicial misbehavior of U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown. In my 37 years on the federal bench, this is the most outrageous conduct by a judge that I have ever encountered in a case in which I have been involved.”

Not exactly glowing commentary.

It appears Judge Brown had predetermined his decision and ignored the expert testimony before him. And what was that testimony centered on? Simple: whether racial gerrymandering was the basis for the Texas 2025 congressional maps — which was repeatedly proven not to be the case.

But this raises a very interesting question: If this injunction is based on rejecting the idea that Texas drew districts based on race… then why have Democrats been allowed to racially gerrymander districts for decades?

I recall when I was in Congress, the district represented by the late Alcee Hastings — a former impeached federal judge — drew in every Black community from Broward up to Palm Beach Counties. Many excused it under Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. But one must ask whether that practice is consistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

That brings us to the case recently heard before the U.S. Supreme Court, Louisiana v. Callais, in October. In 2022, the Republicans in Louisiana redrew their congressional maps and, predictably, the usual suspects claimed the maps “illegally diluted Black voting power.”

As a Black man myself — though Joe Biden says I am not, since I didn’t vote for him — I find the phrase “Black voting power” rather interesting. Does my vote lack value because I refuse to align with Marxist leftism?

Republicans must realize that racial gerrymandering is only “allowed” when it serves the Marxist left’s definition of “Black voting power.” If you are a Black conservative — former RPT Chairman, current Chairman of the Dallas County GOP — then apparently you have no “protected” voting power. After all, “You ain’t Black.”

The real hypocrisy is this: the U.S. Supreme Court has already heard arguments in Louisiana v. Callais, and the lower federal court in that case affirmed that racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court appears to have recognized this leftist hypocrisy and has placed a stay on the frivolous decision of the lower court.

So now, what happens?
If SCOTUS upholds the 2–1 ruling in Texas, it signals how they may rule in the Louisiana case. Democrats could lose 19–20 seats across the South.

Think about that:

• In Texas, Democrats argue that districts were drawn based on race.
• In Louisiana, Democrats argue that districts must be drawn based on race to preserve “Black voting power.”

You cannot have it both ways — unless you are a leftist.

Let us not forget Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D–FL), just indicted for stealing $5 million in FEMA funds for her campaign. Or Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D–IL), Rep. Corrine Brown (D–FL), and Rep. William “Cold Cash” Jefferson (D–LA). All celebrated beneficiaries of “Black voting power.” All felons. But racial gerrymandering to support them? Peachy keen.

And don’t get me started on the leftist-run states that weaponize partisan gerrymandering to wipe out Republican representation entirely. How many blue states have zero GOP congressional members? Yet Texas is the one under judicial scrutiny.

It is time we stop allowing Marxist leftists to define the narrative. The hypocrisy is unbearable. Leftists complain about practices they themselves rely upon — loudly, frequently, and strategically.

This is exactly why the courts matter. And I imagine President Trump is now questioning why he appointed Judge Jeffrey Brown — and who recommended him. These are the judges determining electoral processes in red states… but never in blue ones.

As the old saying goes:

“There are rules for thee, but not for me.”

Perhaps it is time we tell a panel like this three-judge court:

Thank you for your recommendation. We are proceeding with ensuring and guaranteeing Texans’ voting power.

Steadfast and Loyal.