New York Democrats urge Supreme Court to stay out of redistricting case

Michael Macagnone, CQ-Roll Call on Feb 19, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Democratic New York officials and voters urged the Supreme Court in court filings Thursday not to intervene in a state court order requiring a new district for the Staten Island-based seat currently held by Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis.

The filings came in response to emergency appeals from Malliotakis and state officials last week, seeking to put the redistricting effort on hold. Malliotakis and other Republicans argued that the court ruling came too late, with just days before candidates start circulating nominating petitions on Feb. 24.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, along with Attorney General Letitia James, filed a brief urging the justices not to get involved in the ongoing state court case. Hochul’s brief argued that the justices should let the dispute play out in state court, which is best able to handle state election law disputes.

The brief argued that “there is sufficient time for New York’s appellate courts to resolve applicants’ appeals on the merits while addressing any such upcoming state-law election-calendar dates. And it is New York courts, not federal courts, that should decide how to balance competing interests in minimizing disruptions to state-law election-calendar dates and in ensuring that the State’s election district map is lawful.”

The trial court order will not interfere with the state’s coming primaries, Hochul argued, as state courts are equipped to handle any delays that would result.

Last month, a state judge found that the current map, which joins Staten Island with Brooklyn to form the seat represented by Malliotakis, violated a provision in the state constitution by minimizing the power of minority voters. The emergency appeals also argued that the underlying ruling, which mandated that mapmakers add Black or Latino voters from “elsewhere,” was inherently suspect and should be considered racial gerrymandering.

The Trump administration weighed in as well last week, asking the Supreme Court to decide in favor of Malliotakis.

A brief from the original map challengers, a group of New York voters, defended the lower court ruling. The brief argued that the state judge properly assessed a history of discrimination against Black and Hispanic voters in New York, particularly Staten Island.

“To redress this unlawful vote dilution, the trial court ordered swift relief that respected its own role in the state’s constitutional structure,” the brief said.

The brief also argued that the Supreme Court only has jurisdiction where a state’s highest court has issued a ruling, not when a state trial court has done so.

The brief pointed out that New York has handled last-minute redistricting in the past without issue even later in the election calendar. In fact, in 2022, the state redrew its entire congressional map after a court ruling on March 31, the brief stated.

Several Republican members of the state redistricting commission filed their own brief arguing against drawing a new map Thursday. They argued that the lower court would effectively have them draw a racially gerrymandered congressional map.

“In so doing, the trial court predestines that any map drawn in compliance with this crude race-based directive will fail strict scrutiny and violate the Equal Protection Clause,” the brief said.

Thursday’s filings came hours after a New York appellate court allowed the redistricting process to proceed.

Mid-decade redistricting hit a new gear last summer after the Texas Legislature redrew the state’s congressional map at the behest of the Trump administration. California soon followed suit with a ballot measure-driven redraw, as well as legislative redrawing efforts in Missouri and North Carolina.

Several other states, including Virginia and Florida, are currently in the midst of the redistricting process. Virginia’s redistricting referendum, initially set for April ahead of June primaries, may have hit a court snag this week.

With House control decided by a handful of seats in the last several elections, experts said redistricting efforts could tip the balance.

_____