Fact check: What are the most notable examples of gerrymandering in California in the 2020 redistricting cycle?

1. Summary of the results

The most notable examples of gerrymandering in California in the 2020 redistricting cycle involve efforts by Gov. Gavin Newsom to redraw the state's congressional districts in response to GOP gerrymandering efforts in other states, such as Texas ^[1]. Newsom's plan would temporarily suspend the state's independent redistricting commission and allow the legislature to draw new maps, potentially giving Democrats as many as five new U.S. House seats ^[2]. This move has been met with lawsuits from Republicans, including a suit filed by Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX13) arguing that the move is "illegal and unconstitutional" ^[3]. Other lawsuits have been filed by California Republicans to block the Democratic-controlled Legislature from considering bills that would allow Newsom to facilitate a special election on gerrymandered congressional maps ^[4]. The plan would be put to a vote in a special election in November, with Proposition 50 being a key ballot measure that would allow the legislature to draw new congressional maps ^[2]. Key points of the plan include:

• Temporarily suspending the state's independent redistricting commission
• Allowing the legislature to draw new congressional maps
• Potentially giving Democrats as many as five new U.S. House seats
• Being put to a vote in a special election in November

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some missing context in the original statement includes the fact that California's independent redistricting commission was created to prevent gerrymandering, but Newsom's plan would temporarily set aside this commission ^[5]. Additionally, the plan is seen as a response to GOP gerrymandering efforts in other states, such as Texas, which has led to a lawsuit from Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX13) ^[3]. Alternative viewpoints include the argument that Newsom's plan is a necessary response to GOP gerrymandering efforts, while others argue that it is an attempt to gerrymander the state's districts in favor of Democrats ^[6]. Some key points to consider are:

• The history of redistricting in California and the creation of the independent redistricting commission ^[5]
• The potential impact of Newsom's plan on the state's congressional districts and the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives ^[2]
• The different perspectives on the plan, including the argument that it is a necessary response to GOP gerrymandering efforts and the argument that it is an attempt to gerrymander the state's districts in favor of Democrats ^[6]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be biased towards presenting Newsom's plan as a response to GOP gerrymandering efforts, without fully considering the potential consequences of temporarily suspending the state's independent redistricting commission ^[1]. Additionally, the statement may overlook the fact that Newsom's plan is not universally supported, even among Democrats, and that there are alternative viewpoints on the plan ^[6]. Potential misinformation includes the idea that Newsom's plan is solely a response to GOP gerrymandering efforts, when in fact it is a complex issue with multiple perspectives and potential consequences ^[7]. Key points to consider when evaluating the potential misinformation/bias in the original statement include:

• The potential consequences of temporarily suspending the state's independent redistricting commission ^[5]
• The different perspectives on Newsom's plan, including the argument that it is a necessary response to GOP gerrymandering efforts and the argument that it is an attempt to gerrymander the state's districts in favor of Democrats ^[6]
• The potential impact of Newsom's plan on the state's congressional districts and the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives ^[2]