Fact check: The Democrats ever redistrict outside of the 10 year census

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, Democrats can and do redistrict outside of the 10-year census cycle, contrary to what the original statement implies. The evidence shows that states are not prohibited from drawing new maps between censuses, although this practice is rarely done ^[1].

California Governor Gavin Newsom is actively planning to counter Texas' redistricting efforts by redrawing California's congressional districts, which would constitute a mid-decade redistricting ^[2]. Additionally, Democratic governors in states like California and New York have threatened to redraw their own congressional maps in response to Republican efforts in Texas ^[3]. This demonstrates that Democrats are not only capable of redistricting outside the census cycle but are actively considering and implementing such strategies.

There is no federal law that prevents states from conducting redistricting more often than the traditional 10-year cycle ^[4], giving both parties the legal authority to engage in mid-decade redistricting when politically advantageous.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original statement lacks crucial context about the reactive nature of Democratic redistricting efforts. Democrats are rethinking their approach to redistricting and considering abandoning their support for nonpartisan commissions specifically to counter Republican efforts ^[5]. This suggests that Democratic redistricting outside the census cycle is largely a defensive response rather than an offensive strategy.

The statement also omits the broader historical and legal framework surrounding redistricting. While the US Constitution does not prohibit partisan gerrymandering, some states have implemented measures to limit the practice through independent commissions ^[4]. This creates a complex landscape where Democrats face existing limitations in states like California and New York that they would need to overcome to implement mid-decade redistricting ^[5].

Republicans benefit from portraying Democratic redistricting as unprecedented or improper, while Democrats benefit from framing their actions as necessary defensive measures against Republican gerrymandering. Both parties have financial and political incentives to control the narrative around redistricting practices.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement contains a factual inaccuracy by suggesting that Democrats never redistrict outside of the 10-year census. The evidence clearly shows that Democrats are actively engaging in mid-decade redistricting efforts ^{[2] [3]}.

The statement may reflect partisan bias by implying that only one party engages in irregular redistricting practices, when the sources indicate that both parties participate in strategic redistricting when it serves their political interests. The framing suggests an attempt to portray Democrats as more principled or restrained in their redistricting practices, which contradicts the current evidence of their willingness to engage in mid-decade redistricting when politically necessary.

The statement also lacks temporal context, failing to acknowledge that political strategies and practices evolve in response to changing circumstances and opponent actions.