Litigation over racial gerrymandering claims could result in South Carolina having to redraw part of its congressional map, which the GOP-controlled state government implemented in early 2022. Civil rights groups sued over the lines, arguing that the 1st, 2nd and 5th congressional districts constituted racial gerrymanders intended to discriminate against Black voters. In January, a panel of federal judges rejected the plaintiff’s claims regarding the 2nd and 5th districts, but struck down the 1st District as a racial gerrymander. The court ruled that in redrawing the seat, which had been competitive under the old lines, Republican mapmakers had impermissibly reduced the influence of Black voters in the Charleston area by moving many into the plurality-Black 6th District, which runs from Columbia to Charleston.

Whether this legal challenge will force the state to adjust its districts remains to be seen, however. In May, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, and oral arguments will start in mid-October. One potential wrinkle is the role of Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn, a longtime powerbroker on Capitol Hill and leader in his state party. A ProPublica investigation found that Clyburn’s team had close contact with GOP officials during redistricting, and that his desire for additional Black voters to be added to his 6th District seat, which had lost substantial population over the past decade, potentially played a role in some of Republican mapping decisions.

Texas’s congressional map faces a number of legal challenges that federal courts have consolidated into one broader lawsuit. The core complaint centers on allegations that the GOP-controlled Texas legislature diluted Latino voter strength in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The plaintiffs claim mapmakers failed to add more seats with a majority Latino citizen voting-age population despite Latinos’ significant contribution to the state’s population growth and the state’s two-seat gain in reapportionment. Additionally, they accuse the mapmakers of weakening Latino voting strength in Texas’s 15th District, which the GOP flipped in the 2022 midterms.

The federal lower court has not proceeded with the case, however, in part because of delays regarding disputes over access to documents by legislators and other relevant parties. This has affected the process of discovery, which allows each side in a case to gather information about the evidence that will be presented at trial. As a result, it’s difficult to say how long it will be until this case moves forward. Considering Texas’s candidate filing deadline for its 2024 congressional primaries is Dec. 11, it’s very unlikely this case will be resolved before the next election cycle is fully underway.

Utah’s congressional map may need to be redrawn as well if a lawsuit currently before the Utah Supreme Court is successful.

In 2021, the Republican-controlled legislature drew a map that split Democratic-leaning Salt Lake County among all four of Utah’s congressional districts — a technique known as “cracking.” The lawsuit claims that this is a partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution. Plaintiffs are also arguing that the legislature unconstitutionally defied the will of the people in 2020 when it watered down an anti-gerrymandering ballot measure that voters passed in 2018.

The Utah Supreme Court heard initial arguments in the case in July and have since asked for more arguments from both sides. But it’s unknown when the next round of arguments will be or when the court will rule. If the lawsuit is successful, it could result in Democrats picking up one seat in Utah, since any district anchored around the Salt Lake City area is likely to lean blue.

There isn’t currently a legal challenge pending against Wisconsin’s congressional map, but many people expect that the Badger State will have to redraw its lines sometime in the next few years. Why? Because with the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz in 2023, control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court flipped from conservatives to liberals, making the court much more receptive to claims of partisan gerrymandering.

During her 2023 campaign, Protasiewicz called Wisconsin’s electoral maps “rigged,” and if the Wisconsin Supreme Court were to hear a challenge to the congressional map, she would likely join the court’s three other liberal justices in striking it down. Wisconsin’s congressional delegation currently consists of six Republicans and two Democrats, despite Biden winning the state 49.4 percent to 48.8 percent in 2020. A fairer map would likely result in Democrats picking up at least one seat.

Republicans in the legislature are already mobilizing against such an outcome. They have demanded that Protasiewicz recuse herself from any lawsuits over the map, threatening her with impeachment if she does not. Republicans have also proposed a compromise where an advisory redistricting commission would draw a new map, but the Republican-controlled legislature would still retain the final power to pass (or not pass) it.

It’s unclear whether Louisiana will end up with a new congressional map ahead of the 2024 election. Like Alabama, Louisiana has faced litigation over claims that its district lines impermissibly diluted the influence of Black voters. In 2022, the GOP-controlled legislature implemented a map that maintained the state’s status quo of one majority-Black seat among six total districts. But Democrats and voting rights advocates argued that Louisiana, which has a population that’s about one-third Black, should have a second district in which Black voters could elect the member of their choice. A lower federal court agreed, ruling in June 2022 that the map violated the Voting Rights Act and ordering the state to draw a new map. The legislature appealed, but the Supreme Court put the Louisiana case on hold while deliberating over the similar redistricting case in Alabama. This allowed Louisiana’s map to be used in the 2022 election.

But a redraw of Louisiana’s map became a renewed possibility after the Supreme Court ruled in June 2023 that Alabama’s congressional lines violated the VRA. Following that decision, SCOTUS lifted its hold on the Louisiana case. Nonetheless, the case remains up in the air following a late September decision by a federal appeals court that canceled the lower court’s next hearing in early October, in which it was expected to approve a remedial map for Louisiana after the state failed to propose an alternate map in 2022. The plaintiffs have asked the Supreme Court for emergency relief to block the appeals court’s decision, arguing the appeals court ruled improperly and in a way that could delay the potential implementation of a new map beyond 2024. In the meantime, the appeals court’s decision gives Louisiana more time to defend the current map and consider new lines.