‘They Need a Two-Thirds Majority’: Redistricting Fight Ignites Fears of Constitutional Power Grab
By Stacy M. Brown
Republican lawmakers across the South and beyond are rapidly redrawing congressional maps in a fierce mid-decade power grab that critics say stretches far beyond the 2026 midterms and points toward a larger and far more consequential objective: locking in enough political power to permanently reshape the balance of American government and potentially open the door to constitutional change.
The escalating battle over redistricting has ignited warnings from voting rights advocates, Democratic lawmakers, constitutional scholars, and even social media influencers who say the aggressive push underway in states like Texas, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, and Louisiana is about more than simply winning a few extra House seats. They argue Republicans are chasing a long-term strategy aimed at building overwhelming congressional and state-level dominance powerful enough to fundamentally alter the nation’s governing framework.
“You want to know why they’re so worried?” one viral social media commentator said in a video that has circulated widely online. “Because it’s their true goal. You know what their true goal is? Their true goal is a two-thirds majority. And do you know what happens when you have a two-thirds majority in Congress? You can change the Constitution.”
The influencer continued, “That’s why they’re pushing so hard for this. That’s why they seem to be penny-pinching every single seat that they can possibly get, because they need a two-thirds majority to change the Constitution.”
The warning comes as Republicans and Democrats engage in what CNN anchor Jake Tapper described as a full-scale “arms race” over congressional maps.
“So, what does this mean, bigger term, bigger picture?” Tapper said during a CNN segment discussing a major Virginia Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Democratic-backed congressional map. “It means that right now, Republicans have an advantage in the redistricting wars part of the midterms.”
Tapper pointed directly to former President Donald Trump urging Texas Republicans to redraw congressional districts mid-decade to secure additional Republican seats in Congress.
“President Trump seeing the midterm elections coming, usually midterm elections go poorly for the party in power,” Tapper said. “He leaned on Texas to redistrict mid-decade, which is what’s unusual about all this happening.”
Tapper said the effort triggered retaliation from Democratic-led states, creating what he called a national “arms race” in congressional map manipulation.
“Right now, we think it’s still shaken out because of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down part of the Voting Rights Act,” Tapper said. “We do think it will be anywhere from a plus one to plus 11 Republican advantage just in terms of the redistricting.”
The modern redistricting fight intensified after the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which weakened key provisions of the Voting Rights Act by eliminating the federal preclearance requirement that once forced states with histories of racial discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing election laws. Critics say the ruling opened the floodgates for aggressive partisan and racial gerrymandering across the South.
Now, voting rights advocates and democracy watchdogs say the current wave of redistricting cannot be separated from the larger agenda outlined in Project 2025, the sweeping conservative governing blueprint organized by The Heritage Foundation and drafted by numerous former Trump administration officials.
According to The Brennan Center for Justice, Project 2025 proposes “far-reaching policy changes that would significantly expand executive power” and poses “an unambiguous threat to American democracy and future elections.”
The Brennan Center warned that Project 2025 includes proposals that could dramatically reshape federal election oversight, including using the Justice Department to investigate voter registration organizations and election officials based on debunked claims surrounding the 2020 election.
The American Civil Liberties Union described Project 2025 as “a federal policy agenda and blueprint for a radical restructuring of the executive branch” authored by former Trump officials and conservative allies.
The organization warned that the plan envisions an administration with vastly expanded presidential authority touching virtually every aspect of public life, including voting rights, civil rights enforcement, reproductive rights, immigration policy, and the federal workforce.
Meanwhile, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund has repeatedly warned that Project 2025 threatens Black political participation and civil rights protections, particularly as federal voting safeguards continue eroding.
The organization noted that the weakening of the Voting Rights Act has already accelerated voter suppression battles nationwide and increased the urgency for states to enact their own voting protections because federal protections are no longer guaranteed.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin warned that minority political representation itself is under direct attack.
“You could see real redrawing of the maps, particularly in southern states, but in states across the country, in ways that essentially get rid of any African American leadership and representation in those states,” Slotkin said. “It’s just another way that the president and his team are trying to make a permanent Republican majority in the United States of America.”
That concern has become especially pronounced in southern states where federal courts have repeatedly found racial discrimination embedded in congressional maps. Alabama and Louisiana both faced legal battles over maps that civil rights groups argued diluted Black voting power in violation of the Voting Rights Act.
A recent analysis published by Black Press Media USA described the current redistricting wave as a direct threat to Black political representation across the South, particularly as Republican-controlled legislatures redraw districts that had previously enabled Black voters to elect candidates of their choice.
The fight intensified further after the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, a decision civil rights advocates say severely weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and opened the door for states to justify racial gerrymandering as ordinary partisan politics.
Voting rights activists told The Guardian that southern legislatures moved with stunning speed after the ruling to dismantle Black-majority districts and dilute Black voting power.
Rep. Joe Morelle accused Trump of openly politicizing the process.
“In Texas, where Donald Trump, who always says the quiet part out loud, said we should redo the Texas congressional lines mid-decade, not because it helps democracy, not because it’s good for the American people, because it’s good for the Republican Party,” Morelle said.
He added, “It’s part of the president’s ongoing efforts to disrupt the midterm elections, because I think he’s definitely afraid of the verdict of the American people.”
Meanwhile, Rep. Jamie Raskin has increasingly framed the broader political fight as a constitutional struggle over whether Congress or the executive branch ultimately controls American democracy.
“You know what the first sentence is in Article 1?” Raskin said during a recent speech. “All legislative power is vested in the Congress of the United States.”
Raskin continued, “We’ve got the power to declare war. Not the president. Not the vice president. Not the national security advisor. Not the president of Russia. Only the Congress of the United States.”
He also pointed to constitutional limits on executive authority involving taxation and tariffs.
“We’ve got the power to tax,” Raskin said. “Not the president.”
The constitutional anxiety surrounding redistricting has grown alongside fears that aggressive partisan mapping could entrench one-party control regardless of shifting public opinion. Critics argue that when combined with restrictive voting laws, weakened federal oversight, court reshaping, and attacks on diversity and civil rights programs, redistricting becomes part of a much broader effort to consolidate power for generations.
Republicans have largely defended the redistricting efforts as legal political strategy no different from what Democrats pursue when they control state governments. GOP officials frequently argue that Democrats in states like California, Illinois, and New York have also manipulated district lines for partisan advantage.
Still, voting rights advocates warn that the consequences now extend beyond ordinary political maneuvering because of the growing overlap between state legislative dominance, weakened voting protections, Project 2025’s proposed expansion of presidential power, and constitutional amendment mechanisms.
The fear among critics is not simply that Republicans may win more seats in 2026. It is that the machinery now being built at the state level could eventually produce enough institutional power to permanently alter how American democracy functions.
And that possibility, they argue, is exactly why the battle over congressional maps has become one of the most explosive political fights in the country.
Leave a Reply