Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

Which states have seen the most partisan gerrymandering historically?

Checked on November 15, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important info or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Partisan gerrymandering has deep roots in the United States dating to the 18th and early 19th centuries, with states such as Massachusetts, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina among the earliest documented practitioners [1] [2]. In modern decades, analysts single out states like Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin and California for especially consequential partisan mapmaking after recent censuses, with Princeton, Brennan Center and media accounts repeatedly highlighting Texas, Florida and North Carolina as extreme examples [3] [1] [4].

1. Origins: “Gerry-mander” and the early states

The coinage of “gerrymander” in 1812 links the practice to Massachusetts—Governor Elbridge Gerry’s 1812 redistricting was lampooned in the Boston Gazette—and historians point to similar maneuvers in Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, showing partisan mapmaking is nearly as old as the republic [5] [2] [6].

2. The 19th–20th century arc: entrenched, then muted in the Jim Crow South

Political scientists note that the practice expanded after the Civil War—especially in Southern states where white Democrats used district design as one of many tools to limit Black political power—then receded in some places once other disenfranchising tools (poll taxes, literacy tests) reduced the perceived need for aggressive district manipulation [2] [6].

3. The modern era: technology and the 21st‑century playbook

Computer-assisted mapping and partisan control of legislatures made gerrymandering more precise after 2008; commentators trace a modern “redistricting scheme” that enabled parties to translate votes into durable seat advantages, especially in states where one party controlled mapmaking [7] [1].

4. States repeatedly flagged by experts and analysts

Scholars and advocacy groups repeatedly single out a set of states for extreme partisan maps in recent cycles. The Brennan Center cited Texas, Florida and North Carolina for especially skewed congressional maps after 2020, and Princeton’s Gerrymandering Project grades state maps to identify the most partisan plans—Ohio, Wisconsin, California and Texas recur in contemporary critiques [3] [1] [8].

5. Examples and notable court interventions

North Carolina’s post‑2020 maps were struck down by state courts and replaced with court‑drawn maps for 2022, illustrating how state judiciaries sometimes check partisan plans; Wisconsin’s legislature also faced state‑court rejection of Republican maps in 2023, and Ohio has been a long‑running battleground over mid‑decade and decennial redistricting fights [3] [4].

6. Bipartisan history and contemporary reciprocity

Multiple sources emphasize that gerrymandering has been used by both parties historically; The Fulcrum and other analysts stress the bipartisan nature of the tool—Democrats and Republicans have each drawn aggressive maps when in power—so lists of “worst states” change with political control and the decade in question [8] [7].

7. Measuring “most partisan”: methodology matters

Ranking states depends on metrics—seat bias, efficiency gap, ensemble simulations or expert report cards. Princeton’s Redistricting Report Card uses a million-plan baseline per state to assess how much enacted maps depart from what’s attainable given geography and rules, while the Brennan Center compares enacted maps against anti‑gerrymander benchmarks; different tools will highlight different states [1] [3].

8. Geography, law and the limits of comparison

Some states are easier to gerrymander due to voter geography (dense urban Democratic clusters vs. dispersed rural Republicans) and state rules (independent commissions versus legislative control). That means a state may look “most gerrymandered” in one metric but not in another; researchers warn against single‑number judgments without methodological context [1] [3].

9. The takeaway for “which states” historically

Available sources consistently name early examples (Massachusetts, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina) for the origins of the practice and, in recent decades, spotlight Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin and California among the most consequential partisan gerrymanders—while stressing that both parties have used the tactic and that rankings depend on the chosen analytic method [5] [2] [3] [8].

10. Limits of this summary and what’s not covered

This account synthesizes the provided reporting and research summaries; comprehensive, quantitative historical rankings by state across every decade are not provided in the sources above, and available sources do not mention a single definitive “top X” list covering the entire U.S. timeline—rankings vary by metric, author and redistricting cycle [1] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
Which U.S. states have the longest history of court-identified partisan gerrymandering?
How did partisan gerrymandering patterns change after the 2010 and 2020 census redistricting cycles?
Which states’ independent or bipartisan redistricting commissions reduced partisan bias most effectively?
How do metrics like the efficiency gap and mean-median difference rank states by historical partisan gerrymandering?
What major legal rulings have shaped partisan gerrymandering outcomes in key states like North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin?