Fact check: Which states have redictrictes between the census in the past

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, Texas and Georgia are the primary states that have voluntarily redrawn their congressional maps between censuses for partisan advantage ^[1]. Specifically, Texas conducted mid-decade redistricting in 2003 and 2025, while Georgia did so in 2005 ^[1]. The sources confirm that midcycle redistricting is rare in the modern era, but these two states have established precedents for this practice ^[1].

Currently, multiple states are considering or actively engaged in redistricting efforts between the 2020 and 2030 censuses, including Texas, California, Indiana, Missouri, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Utah, Louisiana, New York, Maryland, and Kansas ^{[2] [3] [1]}. However, the analyses distinguish between states that have actually completed mid-decade redistricting versus those merely considering it or involved in court-ordered redistricting.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks several crucial pieces of context that the analyses reveal:

• Legal framework: States are not legally prohibited from drawing new maps between censuses, though it is rarely practiced ^[4]. The Supreme Court has given states "increasingly unfettered power in redistricting" over the past decade ^[4].
• Motivations and beneficiaries: The analyses show that mid-decade redistricting is primarily driven by partisan advantage rather than population changes or other neutral factors ^[1]. Political parties and their leadership benefit significantly from these redistricting efforts, as they can potentially shift the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives ^[2].
• Current political landscape: The analyses reveal an ongoing "redistricting arms race" where multiple states are simultaneously considering map changes, suggesting coordinated political strategy rather than isolated incidents ^[2].
• Court involvement: Many current redistricting efforts involve court orders or litigation, particularly related to partisan gerrymandering, racial gerrymandering, and Voting Rights Act claims ^[5], which represents a different category from voluntary mid-decade redistricting.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears neutral but contains an implicit assumption that may be misleading. By asking "which states have redistricted between the census," it suggests this is a common practice, when the analyses clearly establish that midcycle redistricting is rare ^[1]. This framing could lead to misunderstanding about the frequency and normalcy of such actions.

The question also fails to distinguish between different types of redistricting scenarios:

• Voluntary partisan redistricting (Texas, Georgia)
• Court-ordered redistricting due to legal violations
• States merely considering redistricting versus those that have actually implemented it

This lack of specificity could contribute to confusion about the scope and nature of between-census redistricting activities across different states and time periods.