HR5449119th CongressWALLET

Redistricting Reform Act of 2025

Sponsored By: Representative Lofgren

Introduced

Summary

This bill would create a nationwide framework that requires independent redistricting commissions to draw congressional maps and imposes strict anti‑partisan and transparency rules. It also sets a federal fallback so courts step in if a State fails to follow the new process and funds commission setup and operation.

Show full summary
  • Voters and communities of color: Plans would be judged first for equal population and Voting Rights Act compliance, with required evaluations of how maps affect minority voters and a rebuttable presumption of partisan bias if a plan shows an advantage in two of four evaluated elections.
  • Independent commissions and applicants: States would use a 15‑member commission chosen from a 36‑person selection pool, with detailed eligibility vetting and a 10‑year lookback for disqualifying political ties.
  • Courts and litigants: If States miss deadlines, a three‑judge federal court would develop maps using the same public‑process rules and may publish interim plans with public comment.
  • State election offices: The Election Assistance Commission would pay States an amount equal to each State's number of Representatives times $150,000 to set up and run commissions, subject to appropriations.

Your PRIA Score

Score Hidden

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Sign up for a PRIA Policy Scan to see your personalized alignment score for this bill and every other piece of legislation we track. We analyze your financial profile against policy provisions to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to start

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

8 provisions identified: 7 benefits, 1 costs, 0 mixed.

Ban partisan maps with clear tests

If enacted, States would have to use single‑member districts and follow strict priorities: equal population, the Voting Rights Act, then real ability for protected groups to elect candidates. The bill would ban plans that favor or hurt a party statewide, using modeling of the last 8 years of federal elections and comparisons to lawful alternatives. A plan would be presumed illegal if it gives a party more than 7% or one seat in at least 2 of 4 listed elections. A party could file within 30 days to trigger review; filing would pause the plan and the court would hold a hearing within 15 days.

Court backstop and firm map deadlines

If enacted, each State would have to pass a final congressional map by the earliest of three dates: its state deadline, Feb. 15 of the federal election year, or 90 days before the next federal primary. If a State misses or is likely to miss, any citizen could sue and a three‑judge court would draw the map. The court would post draft plans and data for free, allow 14 days for public comments, then publish a final plan. Any party could move certain state cases to federal court, and the federal court would send back claims it lacks jurisdiction over. These steps would apply after the 2030 census and later cycles.

Federal rules and map enforcement

If enacted, federal law would direct States to follow this Act’s rules when redistricting after apportionment. The Attorney General and any harmed State citizen could sue in federal court, and winning private parties could get fees and costs. Complaints would be sent to the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate. No one could claim legislative privilege in these cases, and courts could not order maps or elections that break this Act. These enforcement rights would apply to redistricting after the 2030 census and later.

Independent commissions to draw maps

If enacted, each State would use a nonpartisan agency to form an Independent Redistricting Commission. By June 15 of years ending in "0", the agency would send a 36‑person pool (12 majority, 12 minority, 12 independent) for approval. States would appoint a four‑member Select Committee by Jan. 15 of years ending in "0" to approve or reject the pool. The agency would make initial and final picks by Oct. 1 and Nov. 15, and each plan must include a written evaluation on communities of color, partisan fairness, and communities of interest. A final plan would take effect after a 45‑day wait once a majority and one member from each category approve it, and DOJ would review unless a lawsuit is filed.

No mid-decade redrawing of maps

If enacted, States could not redraw congressional maps mid‑decade. A court could still order new maps to follow the Constitution or voting laws. This would apply to maps drawn after the 2020 census and later and would be enforced like other parts of the Act.

Federal grants for map-drawing costs

If enacted, the Election Assistance Commission would pay each State its number of Representatives × $150,000 within 30 days of apportionment. No payment would go to States with one or fewer Representatives. Payments would depend on Congress funding them and on the State certifying it met the selection‑pool or qualifying‑commission rules (with exceptions for qualifying States and Iowa). This would apply to redistricting after the 2030 census and later.

Qualifying state commissions can continue

If enacted, a State that already uses an independent commission could keep it if it meets seven rules and keeps them in place. The rules cover public applications, disqualifications, conflict checks, multi‑party makeup, use of this Act’s map criteria, public input, and a broad approval vote that includes three groups. Iowa could keep its current system if it stays under the same law. GAO would report by May 15 of years ending in "1" on whether commissions met the diversity and composition rules.

New hiring and vendor disclosure rules

If enacted, commissions would approve hires and contracts by a majority that includes at least one member from each selection pool. Applicants and vendors would have to report 10 years of political spending and related income, then file annual reports. The commission could not hire or contract with disqualified people unless it unanimously waives the rule after reviewing the report.

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

Lofgren

CA • D

Cosponsors

  • Brownley

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Larson (CT)

    CT • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Ross

    NC • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Veasey

    TX • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Aguilar

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Barragan

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Bell

    MO • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Bera

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Carbajal

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Chu

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Cisneros

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Cleaver

    MO • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Correa

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Costa

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • DeSaulnier

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Doggett

    TX • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Friedman

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Garamendi

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Garcia (CA)

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Gomez

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Harder (CA)

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Huffman

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Johnson (GA)

    GA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Kamlager-Dove

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Khanna

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Levin

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Liccardo

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Lieu

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Matsui

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Min

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Mullin

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Panetta

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Pelosi

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Peters

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Rivas

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Ruiz

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Sanchez

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Sherman

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Simon

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Swalwell

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Takano

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Thompson (CA)

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Torres (CA)

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Tran

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Whitesides

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Waters

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Jacobs

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Gray

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Landsman

    OH • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Vargas

    CA • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Carson

    IN • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Mrvan

    IN • D

    Sponsored 9/18/2025

  • Green, Al (TX)

    TX • D

    Sponsored 9/23/2025

  • Foushee

    NC • D

    Sponsored 9/23/2025

  • Quigley

    IL • D

    Sponsored 10/10/2025

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov
Back to Legislation

Take It Personal

Get Your Personalized Policy View

Start a Free Government Policy Watch to see how policy affects your household, then upgrade to PRIA Full Coverage for year-round monitoring.

Already have an account? Sign in