Fact check: Gerrymandering by Democrats is has occurred in how many states where they control redistricting?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, the exact number of states where Democrats control redistricting and have engaged in gerrymandering cannot be definitively determined from the available sources. However, several specific examples emerge:

Confirmed Democratic gerrymandering has occurred in Maryland and Illinois, where Democrats drew "aggressively gerrymandered maps" despite controlling the redistricting process ^[1]. Additional states mentioned include New Mexico, Oregon, and New Jersey, where Democrats "drew skewed maps" ^[2].

Notably, several Democratic-controlled states have opted for independent redistricting processes rather than partisan gerrymandering. In New York, Washington, and Colorado, despite Democrats holding "the governorship and both chambers of the legislature," maps are drawn by "independent or bipartisan redistricting commissions" ^[1].

California presents a complex case - while some have claimed it represents Democratic gerrymandering, the map was actually "drawn by a bipartisan commission" and analysis suggests California "is not a dramatic outlier in terms of gerrymandering" ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks crucial context about the broader redistricting landscape. The analyses reveal that partisan gerrymandering is not illegal under the U.S. Constitution, though it can be challenged in state courts ^[4]. This legal framework benefits both parties when they control redistricting processes.

Republican gerrymandering is notably absent from the question's scope, creating an incomplete picture of the redistricting wars. The sources suggest that Democrats are "likely to lose the redistricting war" overall ^[5], indicating that Republican-controlled states may be engaging in more extensive gerrymandering.

Independent redistricting commissions represent a significant trend that the original question overlooks. Some states have "entrusted redistricting to special commissions to limit gerrymandering" ^[4], suggesting that the binary framing of Democratic control leading to gerrymandering misses nuanced approaches to redistricting reform.

Political strategists and party leadership benefit from maintaining focus on opposing party gerrymandering while downplaying their own party's practices, as this narrative supports fundraising and voter mobilization efforts.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The question contains implicit bias by focusing exclusively on Democratic gerrymandering while ignoring the broader context of partisan redistricting by both parties. This framing suggests that gerrymandering is primarily a Democratic problem, which contradicts the available evidence.

The assumption that Democratic control automatically leads to gerrymandering is contradicted by examples of Democratic-controlled states that have implemented independent redistricting processes ^[1]. This oversimplification ignores the complexity of redistricting politics and reform efforts.

The question's framing may serve partisan interests by directing attention away from Republican gerrymandering efforts and the overall structural issues with partisan redistricting. This selective focus benefits those who want to portray gerrymandering as a uniquely Democratic problem rather than a systemic issue affecting both parties.