California Democrats scored a big win on Proposition 50 in federal court Wednesday after judges rejected Republicans’ argument that the new gerrymandered map is racist.
The controversial measure, which was approved by voters last November, allows California to redraw its congressional lines and could help Democrats add up to five more seats the US House — helping them in their fight to reclaim Congress in the 2026 midterms.
Gov. Gavin Newsom led the Prop 50 effort in a response to President Trump and Republicans in other states attempting to redraw lines. The governor’s office was quick to gloat in a social media post Wednesday.
“Can’t spell Republican without an L,” Newsom’s troll office posted on X.
Newsom himself tweeted out “FAFO,” an acronym for “F–k around and find out,” a phrase favored by the Trump administration and commonly used as a flex.
Republicans contested the maps drawn by Prop 50, claiming that the new lines would unfairly benefit Latino voters at the expense of other racial groups. Wednesday’s ruling followed a three-day hearing in December in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Attorney General Bonta championed the ruling, saying the “decision upholds the will of the people.”
“It also means that, to date, every single challenge against Proposition 50 has failed,” Bonta said in a statement. “I couldn’t be prouder of my team for successfully defending this ballot initiative in court on behalf of Governor Newsom and Secretary of State Weber. We remain confident in the legality of Proposition 50.”
State Asemblymember David Tangipa, who was part of the Republican group that sued the state over Prop. 50, was not immediately available for comment Wednesday as he and staff reviewed the ruling.
Tangipa previously told The Post in an interview that Republicans would challenge the decision all the way to the Supreme Court.
Judges Josephine L. Staton and Wesley L. Hsu both ruled to deny the preliminary injuction, with Station noting in her opinion that “the record contains a mountain of statements reflecting the partisan goals of Proposition 50, from which Challengers have culled a molehill of statements showing race consciousness.”
In dissent, Judge Kenneth K. Lee noted that Paul Mitchell, the Democratic consultant who wrote the maps and refused to appear in court, had “publicly boasted” that race likely played a predominant role in the way maps were drawn.
“To be sure, California’s main goal was to add more Democratic congressional seats,” Lee wrote. “But that larger political gerrymandering plan does not allow California to smuggle in racially gerrymandered seats.”
Rep. Ken Calvert, who is planning to run in this year against fellow GOP Rep. Young Kim after his Riverside County district was carved up by the new maps, called the judges’ decision “disappointing.”
“The liberal judges conveniently ignored statements made by the Democrat’s mapmaker that race was a predominant factor in his line-drawing, which is a violation of the equal protection rights afforded under our Constitution,” Calvert said in a statement. “I hope this ruling is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
