Proposing a constitutional amendment to prohibit the legislature, when apportioning a congressional district of which a majority of residents are included in a demographic group that is a minority in this state, from reducing the proportion of that group in the district if the legislature has apportioned the district at least once since the publication of the most recent United States decennial census.

89th Legislature, 1st Called Session (2025) Introduced by Borris Miles

Texas constitutional amendment prohibiting legislature from reducing minority representation proportions in districts where minorities form majorities after initial post-census reapportionment.

Filed

#legislature(i0520) #redistricting(i0645) #resolutions--constitutionalamendments(i0661)

Legislative bill overview

SJR 2 proposes a constitutional amendment that would restrict the Texas legislature's ability to redraw congressional districts where a minority group forms the majority of residents. Specifically, it would prohibit reducing the proportion of that minority group in such districts once the district has been reapportioned at least once since the last 2020 census. The amendment would require voter approval through a statewide referendum.

Why is this important

Congressional redistricting occurs every 10 years after the census and significantly affects electoral representation and political power. This amendment would constitutionally protect minority voting strength in certain districts, making it harder for legislatures to dilute minority representation through subsequent redistricting cycles. The real-world impact depends heavily on how courts interpret "reducing the proportion" and whether this constrains legitimate redistricting decisions or prevents partisan dilution of minority voting power.

Potential points of contention

Interpretation ambiguity: The phrase "reducing the proportion" lacks precise definition—what percentage decline triggers the prohibition? A 1% reduction or 10%? This could create litigation and inconsistent application.

Competing constitutional interests: The amendment may conflict with other redistricting principles (compactness, contiguity, partisan balance) and existing Voting Rights Act requirements, creating legal complexity.

One-time lock-in effect: Freezing district composition after a single reapportionment could entrench demographics from 2021 decisions for the entire decade, potentially preventing adjustments that reflect actual population changes or address past gerrymandering.

Scope questions: Unclear whether this applies only to state legislative districts, federal congressional districts, or both, and how it interacts with federal voting rights protections.