Fact check: How many US states have undergone mid-cycle redistricting since 2000?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, there is insufficient data to provide a definitive answer to the question of how many US states have undergone mid-cycle redistricting since 2000. The sources identify only two confirmed cases:

• Texas - underwent mid-cycle redistricting in 2004 ^[1] and was attempting another round during the time these sources were written ^{[2] [3] [4]}
• Louisiana - has undergone mid-cycle redistricting ^[3]

The analyses suggest that other states may have engaged in similar practices, with mentions of Ohio, Florida, California, New York, and Missouri as potential candidates ^{[1] [5] [6]}, but none of the sources provide comprehensive documentation or specific counts.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question seeks a specific numerical answer that the available analyses cannot provide. Critical missing context includes:

• No comprehensive database or systematic tracking of mid-cycle redistricting across all 50 states since 2000
• Lack of clear definition of what constitutes "mid-cycle redistricting" versus other forms of redistricting adjustments
• Historical precedent and legal framework - the analyses mention that Texas was "attempting to break the tradition of redistricting only after the census" ^[2], suggesting this practice goes against established norms
• Impact of Supreme Court decisions - particularly the Rucho v. Common Cause decision that "generated a new era of partisan rivalry" ^[7], which may have influenced the frequency of mid-cycle redistricting

Political motivations are evident, as the analyses indicate that Republican-controlled states like Texas benefit from mid-cycle redistricting to gain partisan advantage ^[7], while Democratic-controlled states like California and New York are considering retaliation ^[5].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself does not contain misinformation, but it assumes the existence of comprehensive data that the analyses demonstrate is not readily available. The question's framing suggests there should be a clear, countable answer when the reality appears more complex.

Potential bias in the sources includes:

• Focus on recent high-profile cases (particularly Texas) rather than providing historical perspective ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}
• Partisan framing that emphasizes political motivations over procedural or legal aspects ^{[7] [5]}
• Lack of systematic methodology for identifying and counting mid-cycle redistricting cases across all states and time periods

The analyses reveal that this question requires more comprehensive research beyond what these sources provide to generate an accurate numerical answer.