Fact check: Which states have redistributed mid-decade in the past

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, none of the sources contain specific information about which states have redistributed mid-decade in the past. The analyses consistently indicate that the sources focus on current redistricting efforts rather than historical precedents ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}.

The sources do identify current states considering mid-decade redistricting, including:

• Texas and California as the primary states currently pursuing redistricting ^{[1] [3] [2]}
• Additional states that may follow suit: Indiana, Missouri, Florida, Illinois, New York, and Maryland ^[1]

One analysis suggests that mid-decade redistricting "is not a new phenomenon" ^[2], implying historical precedent exists, but no specific states or instances are identified.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses reveal significant missing historical context that would be essential to fully answer the original question. The sources focus heavily on:

• Current political motivations: The redistricting efforts are described as sparked by President Trump and represent a "bold move by Republicans and Democrats to gain an advantage in the upcoming elections" ^{[2] [3]}
• Legal framework changes: Supreme Court rulings have given states "increasingly unfettered power in redistricting" ^[6]
• Partisan implications: The current efforts are characterized as an "arms race" between parties ^[1]

Key missing information includes:

• Specific historical examples of mid-decade redistricting
• Legal precedents and outcomes from past cases
• Success rates and political consequences of previous mid-decade redistricting attempts
• Constitutional or statutory limitations that may have changed over time

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself does not contain misinformation, as it is a straightforward factual inquiry. However, the lack of available historical data in the sources suggests potential issues:

• Incomplete research base: The analyses indicate that readily available sources may not contain comprehensive historical information about mid-decade redistricting ^{[1] [4] [2]}
• Present-bias in coverage: Media sources appear to focus on current political developments rather than providing historical context ^{[3] [1]}
• Potential knowledge gap: The absence of historical examples in multiple sources suggests this information may be less documented or accessible, which could lead to incomplete understanding of the practice's precedents and implications

The question appears legitimate and unbiased, but answering it comprehensively would require sources with deeper historical analysis than those currently available in the analyses provided.