Fact check: Which states have seen significant changes in voting districts due to court-ordered redistricting since 2015?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, several states have experienced significant changes in voting districts due to court-ordered redistricting since 2015:

North Carolina stands out as a clear example, where the Supreme Court found that Republican lawmakers unlawfully used race to redraw voting districts ^[1]. This represents a definitive case of court-ordered redistricting changes.

Texas emerges as the most frequently mentioned state across multiple sources. The state has seen significant changes with its current map being challenged in court by civil rights groups ^[2]. Texas has earned an F grade from the Gerrymander Project for its gerrymandering practices ^[3] and is actively pushing redistricting plans to add 5 GOP House seats before 2026 elections ^[4].

Other states mentioned include:

• Illinois - highlighted for significant gerrymandering issues ^[3] and mentioned as undertaking mid-decade redistricting efforts ^[4]
• Virginia and Arizona - noted for making efforts to create fairer district maps through independent commissions or special masters ^[3]
• California - mentioned for setting up commissions to de-politicize the redistricting process ^[2] and considering mid-decade redistricting ^[4]
• Indiana, New York, Missouri, and Florida - all mentioned as states considering or undertaking mid-decade redistricting efforts ^[4]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question focuses specifically on court-ordered redistricting, but the analyses reveal a broader landscape of redistricting changes. Some states like California and Illinois have proactively undertaken efforts to reform their redistricting processes through commissions rather than waiting for court intervention ^[2].

The analyses suggest that Republican-controlled states like Texas and North Carolina have been more frequently subject to court challenges, while some states have voluntarily adopted independent redistricting commissions. This indicates that court-ordered changes may be more common in states where partisan gerrymandering has been most egregious.

Political parties and incumbent politicians benefit significantly from maintaining control over redistricting processes, as evidenced by Texas's push to add 5 GOP House seats ^[4]. Conversely, civil rights groups and voting rights organizations benefit from successful court challenges that force more equitable redistricting.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears neutral and factual, seeking specific information about court-ordered redistricting changes. However, it may inadvertently narrow the scope by focusing only on court-ordered changes while missing the broader context of voluntary redistricting reforms.

The question's timeframe of "since 2015" is appropriate, as this period has seen significant Supreme Court activity on redistricting issues, with the Court giving states "increasingly unfettered power in redistricting" over the past decade ^[2]. However, the analyses don't provide comprehensive coverage of all states that have experienced court-ordered redistricting since 2015, suggesting that the available sources may not capture the complete picture of redistricting litigation nationwide.