GOP SHATTERS STATE’S Map

Tennessee Republicans have redrawn the state’s congressional map, splitting Memphis’s majority-Black district across three separate congressional zones — a move critics call racial vote dilution but supporters defend as lawful partisan redistricting backed by Supreme Court precedent.

Story Snapshot

Tennessee’s Republican-controlled legislature passed House Bill 7003 during a special session, splitting Shelby County (Memphis) into three congressional districts.
The map eliminates Tennessee’s only Democratic-held congressional seat, potentially delivering an all-Republican nine-member delegation.
Republican sponsors cite the Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, which prohibits drawing maps based on race, as legal cover for the new configuration.
Critics, including civil rights attorneys and Congressman Steve Cohen, testified the split was designed to minimize Black voting power across the three new districts.

What the New Map Actually Does

Tennessee’s Republican leadership, led by House Speaker Cameron Sexton and Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, introduced the redistricting legislation as House Bill 7003 and Senate Bill 7004 during a special session called by the governor. The House passed the bill 25 to 5, achieving the required constitutional majority. The Senate followed with its own passage, sending the map to the governor. The new configuration splits Shelby County — home to Memphis — into three separate congressional districts: the 3rd, 5th, and 9th.

Perhaps the most striking change involves the 9th Congressional District, previously a compact, majority-Black Memphis district. Under the new map, the 9th is relocated to cover Bedford and Moore counties in rural Middle Tennessee, effectively erasing its urban Black population base. Nashville also sees its representation fragmented, carved among the 4th, 6th, and 7th districts — a detail critics largely ignore when accusing Republicans of targeting only Memphis’s Black community.

The Legal and Political Argument Republicans Are Making

Republican sponsors have been direct about their political goals. Senate sponsor John Stephens stated on the record that “Tennessee is a conservative state and its congressional delegation should reflect that political reality.” That candid admission of partisan intent actually strengthens the GOP’s legal position rather than weakening it. The Supreme Court has long held that partisan gerrymandering — drawing maps to favor one party — is a political question beyond federal court reach. Drawing a map to elect more Republicans is legally distinct from drawing one based on race.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Louisiana v. Callais reinforced that drawing congressional maps based on race is itself unconstitutional. Republicans argue their map was drawn on population equality and partisan criteria — both legally permissible — not racial composition. Critics have produced no precinct-level demographic analysis, no compactness scoring, and no alternative map simulations demonstrating the three-district split was unnecessary to achieve equal apportionment under 2020 census figures. Accusations of racial intent, however emotionally charged, require more than testimony about outcomes.

What Critics Are Saying — and Where Their Case Falls Short

Civil rights attorney Walter Bailey testified before the legislature, asking directly: “Why did you split the Black vote up almost exactly in the three districts? Because you wanted to minimize it and kill it.” Congressman Steve Cohen called the new districts “impossible districts to be able to campaign and meet with people.” These are serious political objections, but they conflate racial effect with racial intent — a distinction courts have repeatedly required plaintiffs to prove under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The photo shows Tennessee State Rep. Justin Pearson (D-Memphis) in a heated face-to-face with the Sergeant at Arms outside a committee room during the May 6-7, 2026 special session on congressional redistricting.

Context: GOP-led legislature passed a new map splitting Memphis's…

— Grok (@grok) May 8, 2026

Protesters filled the Tennessee State Capitol during the special session, and some demonstrations turned heated. One Democratic lawmaker even called for Memphis to secede from the state over the redistricting decision. The political passion is understandable — losing the only Democratic congressional seat in a state where Democrats still draw roughly 35% of presidential votes is a significant blow. But passion is not a legal standard. Without forensic demographic data, compactness analysis, or documented evidence that race — not partisanship — was the predominant factor in drawing the map, a Voting Rights Act challenge faces a steep climb in today’s federal courts. Republicans drew a map that benefits their party. That is politics, and under current law, it is legal.