Crockett Melts Down After SCOTUS Upholds TX Map Favorable to GOP
The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for Texas to use its new congressional map in the upcoming 2026 midterms, granting a major victory to President Donald Trump and GOP leaders who have pushed a nationwide strategy of mid-decade redistricting to shore up Republican control of the House.
The unsigned order blocks a lower federal court ruling that found the map likely unconstitutional on racial-gerrymandering grounds and said the boundaries could not be used.
The ruling, which arrived just days before Texas’s December 8 candidate filing deadline, means the state can proceed with a map expected to flip as many as five Democratic-held seats into the Republican column. With Republicans currently clinging to a narrow majority, those pickups could determine the balance of power for the final two years of Trump’s presidency.
The justices said the lower court “likely did so in error” when it blocked the map and criticized the panel for failing to honor “the presumption of legislative good faith by construing ambiguous direct and circumstantial evidence against the legislature.”
The Supreme Court also said the district court violated the Purcell principle, which warns federal judges against making late-breaking changes to election rules.
“The District Court improperly inserted itself into an active primary campaign, causing much confusion and upsetting the delicate federal-state balance in elections.”
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, wrote that it was “indisputable” the “impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.”
AdvertisementThat assertion is legally significant because federal courts may not intervene in partisan gerrymandering cases. The constitutional question is whether race — not politics — drove the design of the districts.
Left-wing Justice Elena Kagan dissented, writing that the majority “disserves the millions of Texans whom the District Court found were assigned to their new districts based on their race.” She accused her conservative colleagues of usurping the role of the trial court.
“The majority can reach the result it does – overturning the District Court’s finding of racial line-drawing, even if to achieve partisan goals – only by arrogating to itself that court’s rightful function. We know better, the majority declares today. I cannot think of a reason why.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton celebrated the ruling, declaring, “The Big Beautiful Map will be in effect for 2026. Texas is paving the way as we take our country back, district by district, state by state. This map reflects the political climate of our state and is a massive win for Texas and every conservative who is tired of watching the left try to upend the political system with bogus lawsuits.” Gov. Greg Abbott echoed him: “Texas is officially – and legally – more red.”
The political ramifications were immediate. With the Supreme Court’s ruling clearing the map for use, Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett is now officially being drawn out of her current district and is expected to face a difficult path to reelection or be forced to run elsewhere, a shift already ricocheting across Texas political circles.
Crockett didn’t take kindly to the celebration about her being potentially redistricted out of office.
“It is hilarious to me that me saying that I will announce what I plan to do on 12/8, like I’ve been saying is scaring the heck out of so many people. The attacks are hilarious… note to those that don’t know how politics works… only the threat gets attacked [shrug emoji],” she wrote on X.
“Again, my decision to go one way or another will be based upon facts & not feelings… historical data, trends, etc.,” she added.
Crockett is expected to announced a run for senate in the State of Texas, where she is likely to suffer a fate no different than that of fellow progressive Beto O’Rourke.
Donald Trump branded “classless” over behavior towards Queen Camilla…
Donald Trump faced criticism after appearing to position himself in front of Queen Camilla during a formal greeting ceremony at King Charles III’s state visit to the United States.
The four-day diplomatic tour was designed to strengthen ties between the two nations. The visit featured a military review on the South Lawn and an address to Congress by King Charles emphasizing the trans-Atlantic relationship.
What Happened
During the formal greeting ceremony, Trump appeared to step in front of Queen Camilla as she moved to shake hands with invited guests. The interaction, captured on camera and widely shared on social media, disrupted the established sequence of royal protocol where visiting monarchs typically take precedence in formal exchanges.
Critics characterized the action as a breach of diplomatic protocol and discourtesy toward traditional customs governing state ceremonies. The moment reignited discussions about Trump’s past interactions with the Royal Family, which have previously drawn scrutiny for deviations from monarchical protocol.
The Response
Some observers offered a more measured perspective, suggesting that the logistical complexities of high-profile diplomatic events frequently result in minor overlaps in movement during crowded ceremonies. Others viewed the moment as a notable lapse in diplomatic awareness regarding established customs.
The broader state visit maintained its focus on historical unity and shared policy objectives despite the controversy surrounding the brief exchange. Digital media shaped public perception of the diplomatic event, with the visual moment carrying significant weight alongside substantive policy discussions.
Photo Of Trump Family On Election Night Turns Heads After People Spot Small Detail!
Melania Trump was noticeably absent from a widely shared family photo taken at Mar-a-Lago on election night, prompting questions about her role in Donald Trump’s political future.
The photograph showed members of the Trump family gathered to mark the results of the presidential election. The missing figure of Melania Trump from the image quickly drew attention on social media and among political observers.
The Photo and Its Significance
The image captured the Trump family at their Florida residence as election results came in. Her absence from the frame raised questions among observers about her level of involvement in the campaign and her future responsibilities.
Melania Trump has maintained a notably low public profile throughout much of the 2024 election cycle. She made limited campaign appearances compared to spouses of other presidential candidates.
Questions About Her Role
The missing presence sparked broader discussions about the expectations placed on presidential spouses. Historically, First Ladies have been expected to maintain a visible public presence and active schedule.
Her approach differs markedly from traditional models of the role. Some observers have noted her apparent preference for privacy and limited public engagement in recent years.
What Comes Next
As Donald Trump prepares for his second term, questions remain about what capacity Melania Trump will assume in Washington. Her future involvement in official duties remains unclear.
Her choices regarding public life and the First Lady role will likely influence broader conversations about presidential spouses and their autonomy in defining their positions. The coming months will provide clarity on her intentions.
California Dems Pass ‘Stop Nick Shirley’ Bill After He Exposed Massive Fraud…
California’s state Assembly passed legislation Tuesday that would enhance privacy protections for service providers, weeks after an independent journalist’s investigation into alleged welfare and hospice fraud drew scrutiny from state Democrats.
The Assembly voted 57-19 to advance AB2624, sending the measure to the state Senate. Assembly member Mia Bonta, wife of California’s attorney general, sponsored the bill, which expands the state’s Safe At Home program to include workers at immigrant service providers.
What the Bill Does
The legislation allows participants to use substitute addresses designated by the secretary of state, keeping home, work and school addresses out of public records while enabling them to receive mail and legal documents, Bonta said. The bill targets what sponsors describe as online harassment and doxing of immigrant service workers.
“It allows participants to use a substitute address designated by the secretary of state, keeping their home, work and school addresses out of public records, while still allowing them to safely receive mail and legal documents through the state,” Bonta said.
The Timing and Controversy
The bill arrived less than two months after independent journalist Nick Shirley released an investigation into alleged fraud within Minnesota welfare programs, and weeks after he traveled to California to examine claims of fraudulent activity in taxpayer-funded hospice operations. Critics say the legislation targets the messenger rather than addressing the underlying fraud allegations.
Assembly member Carl DeMaio, a Republican, urged colleagues to reject the measure. “Nick Shirley shows up with his camera crew to the Somali Learning Center – or maybe one of the 90 fake hospices operating in a building in Los Angeles that was highlighted by CBS News,” DeMaio said.
“People have a right to go out there and kick the tires and find out what these organizations are doing with our taxpayer funds,” DeMaio added.
Supporters’ Position
Co-sponsor Christopher M. Ward, a Democrat from San Diego, said the state has a responsibility to protect people who face targeting because of their work. Bonta stated that employees at immigrant service providers have been targeted and doxed online.
