Fact check: What states have redrawn congressional districts outside of the census review process?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, multiple states have redrawn or are attempting to redraw congressional districts outside of the traditional census review process. The most prominent example is Texas, where Governor Greg Abbott has proposed a mid-decade redistricting effort, with state Republicans convening in Austin for a 30-day special session to redraw the state's congressional map ^{[1] [2]}. This Texas initiative could potentially add 5 GOP House seats before the 2026 elections ^[1].

Other states actively considering or pursuing redistricting outside the census cycle include:

• Ohio, Indiana, South Carolina, Missouri, Nebraska, and Florida - where Republicans are attempting to redraw districts to gain more GOP-friendly seats ^[3]
• California, Indiana, New York, and Missouri - which are also considering redistricting efforts ^[1]

The legal framework allows this practice, as the Supreme Court has ruled that federal courts have no authority to intervene in partisan gerrymandering cases, and states are not prohibited from drawing new maps between censuses, although it is rarely done ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important historical and legal context about why this practice is significant. While states are legally permitted to redraw districts between censuses, this practice is extremely rare and represents a departure from established norms ^[2]. Texas is described as "bashing through norms that were keeping folks in check" ^[2].

The timing and political motivations are crucial missing elements:

• This redistricting wave is happening strategically before the 2026 midterm elections to maximize political advantage ^[4]
• Experts warn that gerrymandering has become more egregious in recent years, with states like Texas, Florida, and Illinois being prime examples, potentially leading to "a systemic cycle of gerrymandering" ^[5]

Different parties benefit from different narratives:

• Republican officials benefit from portraying this as legal and strategic political maneuvering
• Democratic officials and voting rights advocates benefit from framing this as norm-breaking behavior that undermines democratic representation
• Legal experts and political scientists benefit from emphasizing the broader implications for democratic governance

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself appears neutral and factual, simply asking for information about which states have engaged in this practice. However, the question's framing could be seen as potentially incomplete because:

• It doesn't acknowledge the legal controversy surrounding mid-decade redistricting
• It doesn't mention that this practice, while legal, breaks traditional norms that have historically governed redistricting ^[2]
• The question doesn't indicate the partisan nature of most of these efforts, which are primarily being pursued by Republican-controlled states to gain electoral advantages ^[3]

The question would be more complete if it acknowledged that while these redistricting efforts are technically legal, they represent a significant departure from historical precedent and are primarily motivated by partisan political gain rather than population changes or other traditional justifications for redistricting.