To prohibit States from carrying out more than one Congressional redistricting after a decennial census and apportionment.
- Sponsor
- Rep. Kiley, Kevin [R-CA-3]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 12, 2026
Bottom line
H.R. 4889 aims to limit states to a single congressional redistricting cycle per decade, thereby curbing partisan gerrymandering through repeated map changes, with exceptions for court-ordered adjustments.
What it actually does
This bill amends existing law (2 U.S.C. 2c) to prevent states from redrawing their congressional district maps more than once after each decennial census and subsequent apportionment of Representatives. The only exceptions are if a court orders a subsequent redistricting to ensure compliance with the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that limiting states to one redistricting per decade after a census promotes stability and fairness in the electoral process, preventing partisan manipulation of district lines that can occur when maps are redrawn multiple times. They contend it reduces political gamesmanship and ensures that districts reflect the population distribution established by the decennial census for the entire decade, fostering more competitive and representative elections.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that this bill infringes on states' rights to manage their own electoral processes, asserting that states should retain flexibility to adjust district lines as needed to respond to demographic shifts or legal challenges that may arise after the initial redistricting. They could also contend that it might inadvertently lock in flawed maps for longer periods if not initially challenged, or that it could be used to prevent necessary updates.
The bill is exceptionally short and clear, making it very accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions quickly.
Section 2
Limit on Congressional Redistricting After an Apportionment
This section amends the existing law (2 U.S.C. 2c) to stipulate that once a state has completed its congressional redistricting following a decennial census and apportionment, it cannot undertake another redistricting until after the next decennial census. The only exceptions are if a court mandates a subsequent redistricting to ensure compliance with the U.S. Constitution or to enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision prevents states from engaging in repeated partisan gerrymandering, which undermines democratic fairness and voter confidence. They believe it ensures that district lines, once drawn, remain stable for the entire decade, reflecting the census data more consistently.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that this provision overly restricts state sovereignty in managing their own elections and could prevent necessary adjustments to district lines in response to unforeseen demographic shifts or legitimate legal challenges that emerge after the initial redistricting.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire for electoral stability and fairness against concerns about states' rights and the flexibility to respond to evolving demographic or legal landscapes.