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

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, several states have engaged in gerrymandering practices that have taken power away from Republicans over the past 25 years:

Illinois emerges as the most frequently cited example, with multiple sources identifying it as a prime case of Democratic gerrymandering ^{[1] [2]}. The state has created districts that limit GOP representation through strategic redistricting.

Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Mexico are specifically mentioned as states with no Republicans in their House delegations, featuring "oddly-drawn districts that limit GOP representation" ^[1]. This suggests systematic gerrymandering to minimize Republican electoral success.

California is repeatedly mentioned as a state that has engaged in or is considering gerrymandering practices ^{[2] [3]}, though it currently uses nonpartisan redistricting commissions ^[2].

New York is also identified as a potential participant in gerrymandering, with Governor Hochul expressing "openness to amending the state constitution to eliminate the commission and allow for gerrymandering" ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question focuses exclusively on Democratic gerrymandering against Republicans, but the analyses reveal this is part of a broader, bipartisan gerrymandering arms race. The sources indicate that "blue states in other parts of the country have used gerrymandering as well, creating an endless cycle of gerrymandering" ^[1].

Key missing context includes:

• The analyses suggest that Democratic gerrymandering often occurs as retaliation for Republican gerrymandering efforts, particularly in response to states like Texas ^{[2] [4]}
• There are legal hurdles that limit Democratic gerrymandering in some states, as "Democrats face significant legal hurdles in attempting to redraw maps in states like California and New York" ^[3]
• The phenomenon of "dummymandering" where parties spread voters too thin and accidentally help the opposition ^[2]

Who benefits from different narratives:

• Republican politicians and strategists benefit from highlighting only Democratic gerrymandering while downplaying their own efforts
• Democratic politicians benefit from framing their gerrymandering as defensive responses to Republican actions
• Redistricting consultants and political operatives from both parties benefit financially from the ongoing gerrymandering arms race

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains significant framing bias by asking only about states that have gerrymandered "to take power away from Republicans" without acknowledging the reciprocal nature of gerrymandering practices. This one-sided framing ignores the reality that both parties engage in gerrymandering when they have the opportunity.

The question also implies intentional targeting of Republicans specifically, when the analyses suggest that gerrymandering is typically about maximizing one's own party's advantage rather than specifically targeting the opposition. The sources indicate this is part of a "race to the bottom where every state tries to rewrite their electoral maps" ^[2].

Additionally, the 25-year timeframe may be artificially limiting, as redistricting occurs primarily every 10 years following the census, meaning only 2-3 redistricting cycles would fall within this period, potentially understating the full scope of gerrymandering practices by both parties.