Fact check: What states have gerrymandered to take power away from Democrats in the past 25 years

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, Texas emerges as the primary state that has gerrymandered to take power away from Democrats in the past 25 years. Texas Republicans have engaged in multiple redistricting efforts, including recent attempts to redraw congressional maps to gain five additional GOP House seats before the 2026 elections ^{[1] [2]}. These efforts specifically target suppressing the vote of people of color and gaining unfair advantages in elections ^[3].

Florida and North Carolina are also identified as states where Republicans have significant gerrymandering advantages that benefit their party at the expense of Democrats ^[4]. The analyses indicate that Republicans have created an "artificial head start" through state-level gerrymandering across multiple states ^[4].

However, the sources reveal that gerrymandering is not exclusively a Republican strategy. Illinois is mentioned as an example of Democratic gerrymandering ^[5], and California is noted as a state where Democrats are considering retaliatory redistricting measures in response to Republican efforts in Texas ^[1].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question focuses solely on states taking power away from Democrats, but the analyses reveal several important missing contexts:

• Bipartisan nature of gerrymandering: Both Republican and Democratic states have engaged in gerrymandering, creating what sources describe as an "endless cycle" of partisan redistricting ^[5]. This suggests the practice is systemic rather than one-sided.
• Legal framework changes: The Supreme Court's rulings have given states "increasingly unfettered power in redistricting," fundamentally changing the legal landscape around gerrymandering ^[6]. This institutional shift has enabled more aggressive partisan redistricting by both parties.
• Potential backfire effects: Republican gerrymandering efforts may sometimes result in "dummymandering," where spreading voters too thin can actually lead to the opposing party winning more seats than expected ^[7].
• Current escalation: The analyses indicate we may be entering a "gerrymandering arms race" or "battle royale," with states considering mid-decade redistricting in response to each other's actions ^{[1] [2]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains an implicit bias by focusing exclusively on gerrymandering that takes power away from Democrats, while ignoring instances where Democrats have gerrymandered to take power away from Republicans. The analyses clearly show that both parties engage in gerrymandering when they control state legislatures ^[5].

The question also lacks temporal specificity beyond "past 25 years," missing the crucial context that recent Supreme Court decisions have dramatically changed the redistricting landscape, making current gerrymandering efforts more aggressive and legally permissible than in previous decades ^[6].

Additionally, the framing suggests gerrymandering is primarily about partisan advantage, while the analyses reveal it also involves racial considerations, particularly efforts to suppress votes of people of color ^[3], which adds a civil rights dimension missing from the original question.