Which Texas regions are most competitive between Democrats and Republicans in 2025 midterms?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Texas’s most competitive regions for the 2026 midterms are south Texas’s Latino-majority districts (notably the 28th and 34th), the newly drawn San Antonio-centered 35th, and several Dallas–Fort Worth and Houston-area districts reshaped by mid-decade redistricting — changes the Supreme Court allowed to stand and that Republican legislators designed to add as many as five GOP seats [1] [2] [3]. Analysts and outlets highlight uncertainty: Republicans engineered a map to control 30 of 38 U.S. House seats, but Democrats see opportunity in at least two of the five targeted districts if Hispanic voters shift [3] [4].
1. Redistricting is the central story — Republicans rewrote the battlefield
Texas Republicans pushed a mid‑decade map to flip five House seats and the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated that map for 2026, meaning many competitive races will be fought on new lines engineered to favor the GOP [3] [5]. The map’s backers aimed to expand GOP control from 25 to 30 of 38 districts; opponents and a federal district court found evidence of racial gerrymandering, but the high court’s interim action left the new map intact for the midterms [3] [5].
2. South Texas — the clearest battleground where demographics meet new lines
Two Latino‑majority south Texas districts — the 28th and 34th — are repeatedly flagged as key competitive targets. Both are Democrat‑held but were carried by Trump in 2024 and were made more favorable to Republicans under the redrawn map, making them top pickup opportunities for the GOP and top defensive priorities for Democrats [1]. Observers caution these are not guaranteed GOP holds: analysts say the 28th (and possibly the 34th) could revert to Democrats in a blue wave or if Hispanic turnout shifts [4].
3. San Antonio’s new 35th District — engineered, but still contestable
Republicans designed a new San Antonio‑centered 35th district as one of the seats they expect to flip; major outlets describe it as a close contest likely to decide whether Republicans can realize their goal of five pickups [2]. Democrats argue economic concerns and swings among Hispanic voters could preserve some of these seats even under the new map [2] [4].
4. Metro suburbs and exurbs — Dallas and Houston reshaped into fight zones
The Dallas area and parts of Houston saw significant reshuffling: districts like the 32nd were redrawn toward Republican voters, prompting Democratic incumbents to seek other seats (e.g., movement into the 33rd), which intensifies competition in suburban corridors [6] [7]. Houston’s map changes also displaced incumbents (for example, Al Green’s move into the 18th), creating unusual matchups and potential vulnerability even in formerly safe seats [7] [8].
5. Two competing narratives about how competitive Texas will be
Republican strategists rely on the map’s engineering and 2024 gains with working‑class Latino voters to argue Texas will produce GOP pickups [1] [3]. Democrats and some analysts counter that Hispanic voters’ attitudes are fluid — noting souring on Trump in some 2025 contests — and that two or three of the newly targeted districts could remain competitive or flip back to Democrats in the right environment [1] [4].
6. What to watch between now and Election Day
Key indicators are turnout among Hispanic voters in south Texas and suburbs, whether national trends produce a “blue wave,” and legal aftershocks to the map [2] [3]. Media and election analysts are already treating the 28th, 34th, and 35th — plus several Dallas/Houston suburban seats — as the loci where control of multiple Texas seats (and by extension the national House margin) will be decided [1] [2] [3].
Limitations and source notes
My account relies on reporting and analysis in the supplied sources about the 2026 battlegrounds and the redistricting fight; available sources do not mention every individual district beyond those cited here, and precinct‑level polling and candidate quality — which materially affect competitiveness — are not detailed in these sources [1] [6] [3] [2] [4].