5 takeaways from the California election after voters passed Proposition 50

from Maya S. MillerCalMatters

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Three months ago, conventional wisdom suggested that the governor. Gavin NewsomThe retargeting plan faced a brutal uphill battle amid an impromptu 10-week campaign sprint.

But minutes after the polls closed at 8 p.m. Tuesday, the Associated Press and national news networks had already announced that Proposition 50 it will pass easily with voters agreeing to temporarily suspend California’s independently drawn maps and accept ones rigged in favor of Democrats.

The landslide victory of Prop. 50 proved Newsom and his allies were right on the measure as a countermaneuver against gerrymanders from Republican states like Texas and an act of resistance against President Donald Trump.

It also spells the beginning of the end for several of California’s Republican House members, who now have to make the uncomfortable calculation of whether to run in their current district, switch to a new seat or drop out altogether — questions they previously could avoid under the guise of “Proposition 50 won’t pass.”

But it’s not yet clear how widespread Prop.’s influence will be. 50 outside California. A five-seat gain for Democrats could offset at least some redistricting efforts in Republican states, though Republicans will gain more seats from an all-out arms race.

Then there is the looming possibility that the US Supreme Court will ban the use of race in the redistricting process, which could gave a big advantage to the Republicans in the southern states.

Opponents also did not give up, although they lost at the polls.

A little more than 12 hours after the polls closed, California Republicans announced a lawsuit challenging Prop. 50 in federal court in Fresno on the grounds that it violates the 14th and 15th Amendments by drawing districts that favor Hispanic voters at the expense of other ethnic and racial groups.

All the while, incumbents and challengers on both sides of the aisle are scrambling to stake out their turf in whatever newly drawn district they think will give them the best chance to win, which can lead to some tense and expensive infighting.

As all eyes turn to 2026, here are five key takeaways from Prop.’s success. 50 and what follows:

Democrats used Trump and national politics

Newsom has repeatedly told Californians that a vote for Proposition 50 is a vote against Trump.

It works.

Throngs of Democratic voters hungry to meaningfully “do something” to oppose what they perceived as an out-of-control Trump administration weighed in on a single-question ballot measure. With thousands of blank ballots not yet counted, the measure was leading by a 64 percent to 36 percent margin Wednesday. Secretary of State Shirley Weber said there was a “tremendous turnout” Tuesday night, with long lines wrapping around buildings at many polling stations.

The nationalization of the campaign, which harnessed many Californians’ palpable fear and revulsion at the actions coming from Washington, muted the case for good government that opponents of Prop. 50 tried to push through.

If it weren’t for the “Trump effect,” the argument against gerymandering would likely play well in California, a state that just 15 years ago voted to take map-making powers away from politicians and give them to citizens.

The opposition lacked money and a clear message

While the Yes campaign focused on antagonizing Trump, the opposition avoided the president and settled instead on a California-focused message of good governance that avoided national politics entirely.

For Cathy Abernathy, a Bakersfield-based Republican political operative and longtime mentor to former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, it was a big mistake.

“The word was, ‘Well, don’t do it for Trump,'” Abernathy said. “Why the hell aren’t we doing everything for Trump?” she added. “Trump didn’t even campaign here for president and he got 40% of the vote.”

Abernathy also criticized the state GOP for its sloppy exit from the ballot mailing blitz, which wasted valuable money by failing to target only voters who had not yet returned their ballots, sending letters to thousands of people who had already voted. She put the blame on consultants who are more interested in making money than winning elections.

“I just don’t think there’s any respect for the money donated to the party by the people who spend the money,” she said.

Let the musical chairs begin

Now that voters have approved Proposition 50, a great reshuffle is underway as some incumbents fight to keep their careers alive in recently reallocated seats while challengers vie for the chance to unseat them.

Five California Republicans in Congress, Reps. Doug LaMalfa, Kevin Kiley, David Valadao, Ken Calvert and Darrell Issa, face much more serious challenges to keep their seats. And on the defensive side, five incumbent Democrats — Reps. Adam Gray, Josh Harder, Dave Min, Derek Tran and George Whitesides — saw their seats become safer.

Among the incumbents switching districts is Calvert, who for more than 30 years represented a Riverside County district that was redrawn east into Los Angeles County. He announced Wednesday that he will instead seek re-election in the neighboring 40th District, setting up an intra-party battle with fellow Republican incumbent Young Kim. Kim raised the stakes Wednesday by announcing that her campaign has already bought $3.25 million in advertising ahead of the June primary.

On the Democratic side, Congressman Ami Berra has announced that he will challenge Kylie in the recently gerrymandered 3rd District, which covers the suburbs of Sacramento. That in turn prompted Dr. Richard Pan, a former state senator and pediatrician who had already announced his candidacy, to move into the newly created 6th District to avoid a tough primary battle with a well-known incumbent.

Legal challenges could change the cards again

California Republicans on Wednesday sued for blocking the Prop card. 50as they had done twice before, to no avail, when the proposal was still on its way to a vote.

The suit, funded primarily by the National Republican Congressional Committee, claims the map causes “stigmatizing and representational injury” by placing certain candidates, such as Republican Assemblyman David Tangipa of Fresno, who is Polynesian, in districts drawn with a particular racial or ethnic minority group.

“The map is designed to favor one race of California voters over others,” said Mike Colombo, an attorney with Dhillon Law Group, the firm founded by Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights at Trump’s Justice Department.

Dhillon’s firm, along with the California Republican Party and Tangipa, is suing Newsom and Weber, asking three judges for a temporary restraining order before Dec. 19, the date when candidates can begin collecting signatures to get their names on the 2026 primary ballot.

Legal scholars say the case faces strong odds. The plaintiffs will have to prove that the underlying intent of the card drawers — and of the California voters who approved Prop. 50 – was a racist rigging without proper evidence of racially polarized voting.

“It’s going to be a very difficult case to win,” said Emily Rong Zhang, an assistant professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. “But if the Supreme Court changes the law, then the likelihood of success here may be higher.”

The justices are weighing Louisiana v. Calais on whether to strike down the part of the Voting Rights Act that requires the creation of districts in which racial and ethnic minorities have a chance to elect their preferred candidate. It can do both Prop cards. 50, as well as those drawn up by the Independent Redistricting Commission, unconstitutional.

Supporters of Prop. 50 have repeatedly said their cards will stand up to legal scrutiny. Paul Mitchell, the data consultant whose firm drew the lines, said the group in many cases stuck closely to the configurations proposed by the Citizens Redirection Commission. An analysis by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute found the new maps largely held communities together.

Regardless of how SCOTUS rules, other states are still deciding whether to join the redistricting wars. Kansas Republicans recently abandoned their attempt to redraw their district lines, citing a lack of support. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, announced on Wednesday that he is forming a committee to propose new congressional maps to eliminate a safely Republican seat in the state held by Congressman Andy Harris, who leads the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.