Texas Redistricting

Redistricting History

1980s‐2010s

Texas Senate Redistricting
82nd Legislative Session
The 82nd Legislature, Regular Session, passed a senate redistricting plan (PlanS148) in May 2011, which was signed by the governor.

Texas v. United States ‐ Preclearance Lawsuit
The Texas attorney general petitioned the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory judgment under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (Texas v. United States) validating the legislatively enacted state senate plan (PlanS148) in July 2011. The D.C. district court heard the case in January 2012 and issued an opinion denying Texas preclearance in August 2012. The state appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. In summer 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the coverage formula used to determine which states and local governments fall under the preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional (Shelby County v. Holder). The court then vacated the D.C. district court's judgment denying preclearance of the legislatively enacted senate plan and sent the case back for further consideration in light of the Shelby County ruling. The D.C. district court found that Texas' claims were mooted by Shelby County and filed a memorandum and order to dismiss Texas' claims in December 2013.

Davis v. Perry ‐ Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution Lawsuit
In September 2011, plaintiffs filed Davis v. Perry in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, alleging that the plan enacted by the legislature (PlanS148) diluted minority voting strength in the Dallas and Tarrant County area and violated the one-person, one-vote rule. The San Antonio court ordered an interim state senate plan (PlanS164) in November 2011. The state requested a stay on the use of the interim plan, which the U.S. Supreme Court granted in December. After hearing Davis v. Perry in January 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the district court's order implementing an interim plan and remanded the case for further proceedings. In February 2012, the San Antonio court ordered a new interim state senate plan (PlanS172) for the 2012 elections.

83rd Legislative Session
In June 2013, the 83rd Legislature, 1st Called Session, passed S.B. 2 adopting the court-ordered interim senate plan (PlanS172) as the permanent senate plan. Plaintiffs and the state advised the San Antonio court that all parties in the federal case agreed to the newly enacted legislative plan as the final remedial senate plan, and the court entered a final judgment on the state senate map in September 2013.

Evenwel v. Perry ‐ 14th Amendment Challenge
In April 2014, the Project on Fair Representation filed Evenwel v. Perry, challenging Texas Senate Districts 1 and 4 under the redistricting plan enacted by the legislature (PlanS172). The lawsuit sought to enjoin Texas from conducting further state senate elections under the plan and asked the court to require the legislature to reapportion the senate districts to conform to the one-person, one-vote clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The suit argued that Texas' state senate districts must be drawn with approximately equal numbers of eligible voters in addition to approximately equal total population. Oral arguments were presented before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, in June 2014. The court issued an opinion in November 2014, dismissing the plaintiffs' challenge.

Texas House Redistricting
82nd Legislative Session
The 82nd Legislature, Regular Session, passed a house redistricting plan (PlanH283) in May 2011, which was signed by the governor.

Texas v. United States ‐ Preclearance Lawsuit
The Texas attorney general petitioned the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory judgment under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (Texas v. United States) validating the legislatively enacted state house plan (PlanH283) in July 2011. The D.C. district court heard the case in January 2012 and, in August, issued an opinion denying Texas preclearance. The state appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. In summer 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the coverage formula used to determine which states and local governments fall under the preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional (Shelby County v. Holder). The court then vacated the D.C. district court's judgment denying preclearance of the legislatively enacted house plan and sent the case back for further consideration in light of the Shelby County ruling. The D.C. district court found that Texas' claims were mooted by Shelby County and filed a memorandum and order to dismiss Texas' claims in December 2013.

Perez v. Perry ‐ Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution Lawsuit
In September 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, started hearings on the consolidated federal lawsuits in Perez v. Perry and ordered an interim state house plan (PlanH302) in November. The U.S. Supreme Court granted the state's request for a stay on the use of the interim state house plan and, after hearing the case in January 2012, vacated the San Antonio court's order implementing the interim plan and remanded the case for further proceedings. In February, the San Antonio court ordered a new interim state house plan (PlanH309) for the 2012 elections.
In September 2013, the San Antonio court denied a request by the state to dismiss claims about the 2011 house map on grounds of mootness. The court also concluded that a full, fair, and final review of all issues before the court could not be resolved in time for the 2014 elections and ordered the 2013‐enacted Texas house map (PlanH358) to be used as the interim plan for the 2014 elections. The court did not make any changes to the election schedule for 2014.
In July 2014, the San Antonio court heard evidence in Perez v. Perry regarding the 2011 legislatively enacted house plan (PlanH283). A hearing on the 2013‐enacted state house plan (PlanH358) will be scheduled at a later date.

83rd Legislative Session
In June 2013, the 83rd Legislature, 1st Called Session, passed S.B. 3, a new house plan (PlanH358) that made changes to 14 districts in Dallas, Harris, Tarrant, and Webb Counties. Other districts in the state were identical to the districts in the interim state house plan (PlanH309) ordered by the San Antonio court.

Congressional Redistricting
Based on the 2010 federal decennial census, Texas was apportioned 36 congressional districts.

82nd Legislative Session
The Regular Session of the 82nd Legislature adjourned without adopting a congressional redistricting bill, and the 82nd Legislature, 1st Called Session, passed a congressional redistricting bill in June 2011 (PlanC185).

Texas v. United States ‐ Preclearance Lawsuit
The Texas attorney general petitioned the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory judgment under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (Texas v. United States) validating the legislatively enacted U.S. congressional plan (PlanC185) in July 2011. The D.C. district court heard the case in January 2012 and, in August, issued an opinion denying Texas preclearance. The state appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. In summer 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the coverage formula used to determine which states and local governments fall under the preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional (Shelby County v. Holder). The court then vacated the D.C. district court's judgment denying preclearance of the legislatively enacted congressional plan and sent the case back for further consideration in light of the Shelby County ruling. The D.C. district court found that Texas' claims were mooted by Shelby County and filed a memorandum and order to dismiss Texas' claims in December 2013.

Perez v. Perry ‐ Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution Lawsuit
In September 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, started hearings on the consolidated federal lawsuits in Perez v. Perry and ordered an interim congressional plan (PlanC220) in November. The U.S. Supreme Court granted the state's request for a stay on the use of the interim congressional plan and, after hearing the case in January 2012, vacated the San Antonio court's order implementing the interim congressional plan and remanded the case for further proceedings. In February, the San Antonio court ordered a new interim congressional plan (PlanC235) for the 2012 elections.

In September 2013, the San Antonio court denied a request by the state to dismiss claims about the 2011 congressional map on grounds of mootness. The court also concluded that a full, fair, and final review of all issues before the court could not be resolved in time for the 2014 elections and ordered the 2013‐enacted U.S. congressional map (PlanC235) to be used as the interim plan for the 2014 elections. The court did not make any changes to the election schedule for 2014.

In August 2014, the San Antonio court heard evidence in Perez v. Perry regarding the 2011 legislatively enacted congressional plan (PlanC185). A hearing on the 2013‐enacted congressional plan (PlanC235) will be scheduled at a later date.

83rd Legislative Session
The 83rd Legislature, 1st Called Session, passed a congressional redistricting bill, S.B. 4, adopting the court‐ordered interim congressional plan (PlanC235) as the permanent congressional plan in June 2013.

State Board of Education Redistricting
The 82nd Legislature, Regular Session, passed the State Board of Education redistricting bill, H.B. 600 (PlanE120), on May 5, 2011. On September 22, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted its approval for the plan under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

2010s timeline pdf

Newspaper articles

Last updated: January 1, 2018

Texas Senate and Texas House Redistricting
The regular session of the 77th Legislature adjourned on May 28, 2001, without adopting a senate, house, congressional, or State Board of Education redistricting plan. The Legislative Redistricting Board (LRB) convened on June 6 and adopted plans for the state senate (PLAN01188S) and the state house (PLAN01289H) on July 24. The plans were submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

A Travis County state district court considered suits against the LRB's house and senate redistricting plans before deferring to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The DOJ precleared the LRB senate plan on October 15, and on November 28 the federal district court upheld the LRB senate plan.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas also held hearings on various legal challenges to the LRB house redistricting plan on November 13‐15. The DOJ denied preclearance of the LRB house plan on November 16, and on November 28 the federal district court put in place a new house district plan (PLAN01369H, which modified the LRB house plan) to address the DOJ's objections.

Congressional Redistricting
In December 2000, three legal challenges were filed in Travis County district court regarding congressional redistricting in Texas. The regular session of the 77th Legislature adjourned on May 28, 2001, without adopting a congressional plan, and the governor did not call a special session to consider congressional redistricting. On September 17, 2001, the Travis County district court began hearing the Del Rio v. Perry and Cotera v. Perry congressional cases, and on October 10, the court issued an order adopting new congressional districts (PLAN01089C). This plan was vacated by the Texas Supreme Court on October 19 (Del Rio v. Perry) because the state district court's time had expired, and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas began proceedings on the congressional case of Balderas v. State of Texas on October 22. On November 14, the federal district court issued an order adopting congressional districts (PLAN01151C) for the 2002 elections.

The 78th Legislature considered congressional redistricting in its regular session and three subsequent called sessions. On October 12, 2003, in the third called session, the 78th Legislature adopted PLAN01374C. The plan was submitted to the DOJ on October 20, 2003, and was precleared on December 19, 2003.

Following the passage of the legislature's congressional plan, four federal court actions, consolidated as Session v. Perry, were filed in mid‐October 2003 seeking relief against the plan. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas heard the case in late December and, on January 6, 2004, upheld the validity of the congressional plan enacted by the Texas Legislature. The plaintiffs appealed the federal district court's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

On October 18, 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded Session v. Perry, involving the Texas congressional plan, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas for further consideration in light of the June 2004 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Vieth v. Jubelirer, a partisan gerrymandering case from Pennsylvania. The district court heard oral arguments on January 21, 2005, and on January 25 issued a decision in the remand of Session v. Perry adhering to the court's earlier judgment that there was no basis to declare the plan invalid. On December 12, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court set the 2003 challenge to Texas' redrawing of congressional districts (now styled as LULAC v. Perry) for oral argument before the court. Argument was heard on March 6, 2006, and on June 28, the court issued a decision finding that the district court's judgment was partly correct and partly in error, and returned the case to the district court for further action. The U.S. Supreme Court found that Congressional District 23 violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and that the creation of a new District 25 did not remedy the problem.

On August 4, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued an opinion in the remanded LULAC v. Perry case ordering changes to five congressional districts (PLAN01438C) to address the Voting Rights Act violation. Special elections for these five districts were held concurrent with the November 2006 general election. The five court‐ordered districts from PLAN01438C were incorporated into the legislature's 2003 plan (PLAN01374C) to create a statewide plan, PLAN01440C.

State Board of Education Redistricting
The regular session of the 77th Legislature adjourned on May 28, 2001, without adopting a State Board of Education (SBOE) redistricting plan. Legal challenges were filed against the old SBOE districts, and on November 2, 2001, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued an order adopting new SBOE districts based on the 2000 federal census (PLAN01018E) for the 2002 elections.

2000s timeline pdf

Newspaper articles

Texas Senate and Texas House Redistricting
The regular session of the 72nd Legislature passed bills redrawing senate and house district boundaries in the 1991 regular session, which were signed by the governor.

During 1991, suits were filed in state district court and federal district court asserting various voting rights violations against the adopted senate and house redistricting plans. After a series of state and federal court actions and the adoption of new house and senate plans in a January 1992 special session, the 1992 house and senate elections were ultimately conducted under federal court‐ordered plans that changed 30 of the 31 senate districts and 37 of the 150 house districts that had been adopted by the legislature during the 1991 regular session.

The 1994 elections were held under districts enacted by the legislature in the January 1992 special session. The senate districts were significantly different from the court‐ordered districts used for the 1992 election. The legislature's house districts differed only slightly from the 1992 court-ordered districts.

On January 25, 1995, Thomas v. Bush was filed in federal court challenging 13 senate districts and 54 house districts as unconstitutionally racially gerrymandered. On September 15, 1995, the court ordered an agreed settlement under which 8 senate districts and 36 house districts were changed to address the alleged gerrymanders, the staggered senate terms drawn by lot in January 1993 were allowed to remain in effect, and the one‐year prior residency requirement was waived for the changed districts so that a candidate could run either in the same numbered district in which the candidate resided under the prior plan or in the new district in which the candidate resided. During the 1997 regular session, the Texas Legislature enacted without change the senate districts approved in the 1995 Thomas v. Bush settlement. That plan was subsequently used for the 1998 elections. The legislature also enacted two bills affecting state house districts, one which approved the state house districts in the 1995 Thomas v. Bush settlement with additional minor changes to six districts, and the other which made minor changes to eight other house districts. The U.S. Department of Justice precleared the changes to the house districts, and the house plan incorporating those changes was used for the 1998 elections. Court actions in the summer of 1997 effectively brought an end to required action by the legislature on 1991 redistricting.

Congressional Redistricting
Under the 1990 federal census, Texas was apportioned 3 new congressional districts, for a total of 30. The 72nd Legislature adjourned in May 1991 without adopting a congressional plan during the regular session, but did enact a new plan in the 2nd Called Session in August.

During early 1991, suits were filed in state district court and federal district court asserting various voting rights violations against the former unmodified congressional districts. After the August special session and a number of legal actions, the 1992 congressional district elections were held under the plan enacted by the legislature in the August special session.

On January 26, 1994, a suit was filed in federal district court in Houston challenging the Texas congressional districts as unconstitutionally racially gerrymandered under the framework of the recent U.S. Supreme Court cases Shaw v. Reno and Hays v. Louisiana. In the summer of 1994, the court held three of the districts unconstitutional. The state appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and proceeded to conduct the 1996 primaries under the state's plan. In June 1996, the Supreme Court upheld the district court's decision. The district court voided the results of the 1996 primary elections in 13 of the state's 30 congressional districts and ordered a special election to be held in those 13 districts concurrent with the November 1996 general election using an interim plan drawn by the court. The district court gave the legislature until June 30, 1997, to enact a permanent plan, but the 75th Legislature did not adopt a plan within that time. On September 15, 1997, the court dismissed all pending motions and ordered the court‐drawn plan into effect for the 1998 congressional elections.

State Board of Education Redistricting
The 72nd Legislature adjourned in May 1991 without adopting a State Board of Education (SBOE) redistricting plan in the regular session, but enacted a new plan in the 2nd Called Session in August 1991.

During 1991, suits were filed in state district court and federal district court asserting various voting rights violations against the former unmodified SBOE districts. After the August special session and a number of legal actions, the 1992 SBOE elections were held under the plan enacted by the legislature in the August special session.

1990s timeline pdf

Texas Senate Redistricting
The 67th Legislature in regular session passed a senate redistricting plan, but the plan was vetoed by the governor. The Legislative Redistricting Board (LRB) convened on August 30, 1981, to consider senate redistricting and adopted a new senate plan on October 28. The plan was submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for preclearance.

In October, Upham v. White was filed in state district court, maintaining that the LRB's senate plan should have been drawn on the basis of "qualified electors" as then required by the Texas Constitution and that population growth patterns should have been taken into consideration. The court rejected the arguments, upheld the senate plan, and did not rule specifically on the qualified electors provision of the constitution. No opinion was published.

A consolidation of suits against the LRB's senate and house plans, Terrazas v. Clements, was filed in federal court in late 1981. The suit claimed that the senate plan violated the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution by diluting the voting strength of blacks, Hispanics, and Republicans and by ignoring communities of interest throughout the state.

On January 25, 1982, the DOJ issued an objection to the LRB's senate redistricting plan. The federal court extended the candidate filing deadline for the 1982 primary, adopted the LRB's senate plan without change for use in the 1982 elections only, and directed the legislature to adopt permanent plans by September 1, 1983.

On May 16, 1983, the senate adopted a resolution petitioning the court to adopt a specified plan changing eight districts. The purpose of the proposal was to avoid a new senate reapportionment for the 1984 elections that would have terminated the staggered terms of the senators elected in 1982 and required the election of an entire senate in 1984. No objections were made to the plan by the DOJ or other groups. In December 1983, the federal district court in Terrazas ordered the proposed senate district plan into effect for the 1984 elections.

Texas House Redistricting
The regular session of the 67th Legislature passed a house redistricting plan, which was signed by the governor. On August 31, 1981, the Texas Supreme Court overturned the house redistricting plan because it split counties in violation of the Texas Constitution, and the LRB adopted a new house plan on October 28. The LRB house plan was submitted to the DOJ for preclearance.

The consolidated suits against the LRB's senate and house plans, Terrazas v. Clements, claimed that the house plan violated the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, diluted the voting strength of racial minorities, interfered with the First Amendment rights of Texas Republicans to associate politically, impermissibly divided communities of interest, and overpopulated certain districts that were predicted to grow substantially, leading to underrepresentation of people in those areas.

On January 25, 1982, the DOJ issued an objection to the LRB's house redistricting plan. The federal court extended the candidate filing deadline for the 1982 primary, adopted the LRB's house plan, with changes in some Bexar and El Paso County districts, for use in the 1982 elections only, and directed the legislature to adopt a permanent house plan by September 1, 1983.

On May 10, 1983, the 68th Legislature in regular session enacted a bill adopting without change the federal court's house plan for the 1982 elections, and the court approved the plan on January 4, 1984.

Congressional Redistricting
The regular session of the 67th Legislature adjourned on June 1, 1981, without adopting a congressional plan. The legislature convened in special session and passed a congressional plan on August 10, which was submitted to the DOJ for preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The DOJ issued an objection to the plan.

The congressional plan was challenged in federal district court in Seamon v. Upham. The DOJ had objected to two South Texas districts in the legislature's plan; the court determined that these objections invalidated the entire plan. The federal district court redrew districts in South Texas and in and around Dallas County, where its decision to draw two districts in which blacks would have had substantial influence but not a voting majority was appealed. The U.S. Supreme Court found that the district court had erred and remanded the case to district court. Because the decision was issued in April and the primaries were to be held in May, the federal district court's congressional plan was allowed to stand for the 1982 elections.

The 68th Legislature left in place the federal court's congressional plan with the two black impact districts in Dallas County, but made changes to other districts in the Dallas area and in Bexar and Val Verde Counties.

State Board of Education Redistricting
In 1984, the 68th Legislature, 2nd Called Session, created a new 15‐member board, serving staggered four‐year terms, with one member elected from each of the 15 newly enacted districts. A transitional board was appointed by the governor to serve until 1989. In the 1988 general election, all 15 members were elected.

1980s timeline pdf

1846‐1982

Overview: Texas Senate Districts 1846 ‐ 1982
The 1845 Texas Constitution apportioned the state's counties into 19 senate districts. One member was elected from each district, and certain counties were represented by two senators. Two classes of senators served staggered four‐year terms.

Apportionments under the 1845 constitution were based on state‐counted enumerations of qualified electors, required to be reported to each regular session of the legislature until 1850 and every eight years thereafter. Therefore, counties were reapportioned to senate districts with regularity until 1860. During this period membership of the senate grew from 19 to 33.

The 1869 Texas Constitution fixed the number of senators at 33, but apportioned counties to only 30 senators elected in three classes to staggered six‐year terms. The legislature was required to conduct reapportionments at the first meeting of the legislature following publication of each United States census.

Current law is derived from the 1876 Texas Constitution. Membership of the senate was fixed at 31 members elected to staggered four‐year terms. Each county was limited to one senator, and the apportionment was based on qualified electors (these last two requirements were removed by constitutional amendment in 2001).

The legislature enacted new senate districts, following publication of the federal decennial census, through 1901. In 1911, the 32nd Legislature, 1st Called Session, passed a senate apportionment bill, which the governor vetoed. Subsequently, senate reapportionment was not addressed until 1921, when it was taken up by the 37th Legislature, 1st Called Session, following the 1920 census.

The legislature did not enact a senate reapportionment bill following the census in 1930 or 1940. An amendment to the constitution, adopted by voters in 1948, created the Legislative Redistricting Board (LRB), with the power to reapportion state house and senate districts if the regular session of the legislature failed to do so following the decennial census. Subsequently, the legislature enacted regular reapportionments of the senate in 1951 and 1961.

In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Sims ruled that the population of state legislative districts should be relatively equal. Under the 1961 reapportionment, Harris County was represented by only one senate district, yet its population was more than eight times larger than the population of the least populous senate district. That same year, in Kilgarlin v. Martin, a federal court held the Texas constitutional provision that restricted each county to one senator unconstitutional. In 1965, the legislature enacted senate districts that divided the large urban counties into multiple single‐member districts for the first time.

In 1971, following the failure of the legislature to enact new senate districts after the federal census, the LRB convened for the first time and ordered new senate districts. After surviving a challenge in federal court, the LRB plan remained in effect through the 1980 elections.

Legislative Reference Library chart listing Texas legislative and congressional redistricting bills: 1880 ‐ present

Overview: Texas House Districts 1846 ‐ 1982
The 1845 Texas Constitution apportioned the state's counties to 13 single‐member districts and 23 multimember districts that elected 53 representatives. All 66 members served two‐year terms. Subsequent apportionments, required at the meeting of each legislature until 1850 and every eight years thereafter, were based on enumerations of "qualified electors." The 1845 constitution allowed the house membership to vary between 45 and 90 representatives.

In 1848, the 2nd Legislature, Regular Session, began apportioning certain counties to flotorial districts in addition to single‐member and multimember districts. Flotorial districts were large multicounty districts that shared overlapping common territory with smaller districts.

The legislature enacted new house districts regularly until 1860. Membership of the house expanded from 49 to 90 representatives.

During Reconstruction, state house districts were coextensive with state senate districts. The 1869 Texas Constitution fixed the number of representatives at 90. Each of the 30 senate districts was apportioned two to four representatives. The legislature was required to conduct reapportionments at the first meeting of the legislature following the publication of each federal census.

Current redistricting practice is based on the 1876 Texas Constitution. Membership of the house was initially set at 93. Future apportionments could expand the number of representatives to 150 based on a population ratio. The legislature returned to the practice of using a combination of single‐member, multimember, and flotorial districts. This method of apportionment continued until 1968.

New house districts were enacted by the legislature, following the publication of each federal decennial census through 1921.

The legislature did not pass state house reapportionment bills following the census in 1930 or 1940. An amendment to the constitution, adopted by voters in 1948, created the Legislative Redistricting Board, with the power to reapportion state house and senate districts if the regular session of the legislature failed to act following the federal census. Subsequently, the legislature enacted regular reapportionments of the house in 1951 and 1961.

In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Sims ruled that the population of state legislative districts should be relatively equal. That same year, in Kilgarlin v. Martin, a federal court held the Texas constitutional provision that restricted the number of representatives apportioned to populous counties unconstitutional. In 1965, the 59th Legislature, Regular Session, enacted new state house districts.

In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court in Kilgarlin v. Hill affirmed a federal district court ruling that invalidated the flotorial districts enacted by the 59th Legislature because they violated the equal population requirement of Reynolds v. Sims. The 60th Legislature enacted a new state house apportionment in 1967 that eliminated the flotorial districts, but retained the multimember districts. In 1969, the 61st Legislature made changes to certain districts enacted in 1967.

In 1971, the 62nd Legislature, Regular Session, passed a house apportionment bill. The act was found unconstitutional by the Texas Supreme Court in Smith v. Craddick because the plan unnecessarily divided counties into more than one district. The Texas Supreme Court, in Mauzy v. Legislative Redistricting Board, also ordered the Legislative Redistricting Board to reapportion the state house. The board ordered new house districts in October 1971. A federal district court, in Graves v. Barnes, later modified the districts by creating single‐member districts for Bexar and Dallas Counties.

The 62nd Legislature, 4th Called Session, 1972, and the 63rd Legislature, Regular Session, 1973, made changes to certain house districts.

In 1974, in Graves v. Barnes, a federal district court invalidated the remaining multimember house districts. In 1975, the 64th Legislature, Regular Session, enacted a new house apportionment plan that for the first time in Texas history was composed solely of single‐member districts. The plan remained in effect through the 1980 elections.

Legislative Reference Library chart listing Texas legislative and congressional redistricting bills: 1880 ‐ present

Overview: Congressional Districts 1846 ‐ 1982
In 1846, the first act of the 1st Legislature of the State of Texas was the adoption of a two‐district congressional plan. Small changes by the legislature were made to the districts because of the creation of new counties in 1850.

Following secession from the Union in 1861, the 8th Legislature, 1st Called Session, enacted a six‐district plan that sent representation to the Congress of the Confederate States of America.

The U.S. Congress did not seat congressional representatives from Texas from 1861 until 1870. However, the legislature enacted a four‐district congressional plan in 1866 that included the two new representatives gained from the 1860 reapportionment.

The Texas Constitution of 1869 included a new four‐district congressional plan. Two additional representatives, gained by the 1870 reapportionment, were elected at large in the 1872 election.

In 1874, the legislature enacted a six‐district plan. The plan was reenacted in 1879 with clarifying language.

Texas gained five additional representatives under the 1880 reapportionment. The legislature enacted an 11‐district plan in 1882.

The 1890 reapportionment added two additional representatives. A 13‐district plan was enacted by the legislature in 1892.

Texas gained three representatives under the 1900 reapportionment. The legislature enacted a 16‐district plan in 1901. The legislature enacted a new 16‐district plan in 1909.

Two representatives were added as a result of the 1912 reapportionment. These new representatives were elected at large until an 18‐district plan was enacted by the legislature in 1917. Since the U.S. Congress could not agree on an apportionment method after the 1920 census, this plan remained in effect through the 1932 elections.

Three representatives were added by the 1930 reapportionment. These new representatives were elected at large until the legislature in 1933 enacted a 21‐district plan, which remained in effect through the 1956 elections. One at‐large representative was added by the 1950 reapportionment. A 22‐district plan was enacted in 1957.

One at‐large representative was added by the 1960 reapportionment. In 1963, in Bush v. Martin, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas held that the Texas congressional districts were unconstitutional, in violation of the one‐person, one‐vote principle. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the decision in Bush v. Martin. The federal district court allowed the legislature to redraw the districts in the 1965 regular session.

The legislature enacted a 23‐district plan in 1965. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas declared the plan constitutional, but retained jurisdiction in the case for the subsequent legislature to make changes that would increase the plan's "fundamental equity and fairness." In 1967, the legislature enacted a revised version of the 1965 plan.

Texas gained only one representative in the 1970 reapportionment; a 24‐district plan was enacted by the legislature in 1971.

A new 24‐district plan (PLAN B) was ordered for the 1974 elections by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (White v. Weiser) to address certain minority voting rights issues. The plan was enacted by the legislature in 1975, with minor revisions.

Legislative Reference Library chart listing Texas legislative and congressional redistricting bills: 1880 ‐ present

Overview: State Board of Education Districts 1866 ‐ 1984
The 1866 Texas Constitution established a board of education. Its members did not represent districts, and its composition varied over time. The legislature created the first State Board of Education to be elected from districts in 1949. One member was elected from each of the state's 21 congressional districts adopted by the legislature in 1933, with board members serving staggered six‐year terms. This election method using the 1933 congressional districts was used for an initial special election in 1949 and each subsequent election until 1970.

In 1969, a federal district court in Freeman v. Dies held that the election procedure for electing the board violated the one‐person, one‐vote requirement because the 1933 congressional districts used to elect board members were of unequal population; districts that contained only one‐third of the state's population elected a majority of the board. In 1971, the 62nd Legislature, 1st Called Session, made the State Board of Education districts coterminous with the congressional districts "established by law."

Following the 1970 and 1980 decennial congressional apportionments, the number of districts and the size of the board of education increased to 24 for the 1972‐1980 elections and to 27 for the 1982 election. In 1984, the 68th Legislature, 2nd Called Session, abolished the 27‐member elected board and reestablished the board as a 15‐member body, with a transitional appointed board that served until new board members were elected in 1988.

Maps

Elections Districts Citation
1972‐1980
(63rd‐67th Leg.)
31 Legislative Redistricting Board, adopted Oct. 15, 1971
1982
(68th Leg.)
31 Legislative Redistricting Board, adopted Oct. 27, 1981; Terrazas v. Clements, 537 F. Supp. 514 (N.D. Tex. 1982)
1984‐1990
(69th‐72nd Leg.)
31 S.R. 599, 68th Legislature, Regular Session, 1983
1992
(73rd Leg.)
31 Terrazas v. Slagle, 789 F. Supp. 828 (W.D. Tex. 1991), aff'd sub nom. Richards v. Terrazas, 505 U.S. 1214 (1992) (mem.) and Slagle v. Terrazas, 506 U.S. 801 (1992) (mem.); PLANS567
1994
(74th Leg.)
31 Chapter 1 (S.B. 1), Acts of the 72nd Legislature, 3rd Called Session, 1992; PLANS560
1996‐2000
(75th‐77th Leg.)
31 Thomas v. Bush, No. A‐95‐CV‐186‐SS (W.D. Tex. September 15, 1995); later adopted as Chapter 218 (S.B. 715), Acts of the 75th Legislature, Regular Session, 1997; PLANS730
2002‐2010
(78th‐82nd Leg.)
31 Legislative Redistricting Board, adopted July 24, 2001; PLAN01188S
Elections Districts Citation
1972
(63rd Leg.)
150 Members:
119 Single‐member Districts; 31 Members in 9 Multimember Districts
Legislative Redistricting Board, adopted Oct. 22, 1971, as modified by Graves v. Barnes, 343 F. Supp. 704 (W.D. Tex. 1972)
1974
(64th Leg.)
150 Members:
119 Single‐member Districts; 31 Members in 9 Multimember Districts
Chapter 8 (H.B. 12), Acts of the 62nd Legislature, 4th Called Session, 1972; Chapter 452 (S.B. 590), Acts of the 63rd Legislature, Regular Session, 1973
1976‐1980
(65th‐67th Leg.)
150 Chapter 727 (H.B. 1097), Acts of the 64th Legislature, Regular Session, 1975
1982‐1984
(68th‐69th Leg.)
150 Legislative Redistricting Board, adopted Oct. 28, 1981, as modified by Terrazas v. Clements, 537 F. Supp. 514 (N.D. Tex. 1982); later adopted as Chapter 185 (H.B. 1389), Acts of the 68th Legislature, Regular Session, 1983
1986‐1990
(70th‐72nd Leg.)
150 Chapter 325 (H.B. 753), Acts of the 69th Legislature, Regular Session, 1985
1992
(73rd Leg.)
150 Terrazas v. Slagle, 789 F. Supp. 828 (W.D. Tex. 1991); PLANH714
1994
(74th Leg.)
150 Chapter 2 (H.B. 1), Acts of the 72nd Legislature, 3rd Called Session, 1992; PLANH738
1996
(75th Leg.)
150 Thomas v. Bush, No. A‐95‐CV‐186‐SS (W.D. Tex. 1995); PLANH849
1998‐2000
(76th‐77th Leg.)
150 Chapter 133 (H.B. 6), Acts of the 75th Legislature, Regular Session, 1997; Chapter 579 (H.B. 2254), Acts of the 75th Legislature, Regular Session, 1997; PLANH882
2002‐2010
(78th‐82nd Leg.)
150 Legislative Redistricting Board, adopted Jul. 24, 2001, as modified by Balderas v. State of Texas, No. 6:01‐CV‐158 (E.D. Tex. 2001); PLAN01369H
Elections Districts Citation
1846‐1848
(1st Leg., Regular Session)
2 Acts 1846, 1st Leg., R.S., eff. Feb. 28, 1846.
1850‐1860
(3rd Leg., Regular Session)
2 Acts 1850, 3rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 134, app. Feb. 11, 1850.
1861‐1863
(8th Leg., 1st Called Session)
6 Acts 1861, 8th Leg., 1st C.S., Ch. 46, eff. Apr. 6, 1861; Acts 1861, 8th Leg., 1st C.S., Ch. 53, eff. Apr. 8, 1861.
1866‐1868
(11th Leg., Regular Session)
4 Acts 1866, 11th Leg., R.S., Ch. 10, eff. Sep. 8, 1866; Acts 1866, 11th Leg., R.S., Ch. 31, eff. Oct. 8, 1866.
1869‐1872
(Declaration, Constitution of the State of Texas (1869))
1869‐1870: 4 1872: 4 and 2 At‐large Constitution of the State of Texas (1869)
1874‐1878
(14th Leg., Regular Session)
6 Acts 1874, 14th Leg., R.S., Ch. 161, eff. May 2, 1874.
1880
(16th Leg., Regular Session(
6 Acts 1879, 16th Leg., R.S., Ch. 102, eff. Apr. 18, 1879.
1882‐1890
(House Substitute for Bills 1, 5, 36, and 41, 17th Leg., 1st Called Session )
11 Acts 1882, 17th Leg., 1st C.S., Ch. 30, eff. Aug. 3, 1882.
1892‐1900
(House Substitute for Bills 1, 26, and 29, 22nd Leg., 1st Called Session)
13 Acts 1892, 22nd Leg., 1st C.S., Ch. 19, eff. Jul. 11, 1892; United States v. Texas, 162 U.S. 1 (1896).
1902‐1908
(Free Conference Committee Substitute for Substitute House Bills 3, 5, and 6, 27th Leg., 1st Called Session)
16 Acts 1901, 27th Leg., 1st C.S., Ch. 5, eff. Dec. 3, 1901.
1910‐1916
(House Bill 448, 31st Leg., Regular Session)
1910: 16 1912: 16 and 2 At‐large Acts 1909, 31st Leg., R.S., Ch. 86, eff. Jun. 11, 1909.
1918‐1932
(Committee Substitute for House Bill 11, 35th Leg., Regular Session)
1918‐1930: 18 1932: 18 and 3 At‐large Acts 1917, 35th Leg., R.S., Ch. 119, eff. Jun. 19, 1917.
1934‐1956
(Senate Bill 195, 43rd Leg., Regular Session)
1934‐1950: 21 1952‐1956: 21 and 1 At‐large Acts 1933, 43rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 135, eff. Aug. 30, 1933.
1958‐1964
(House Bill 229, 55th Leg., Regular Session)
1958‐1960: 22 1962‐1964: 22 and 1 At‐large Acts 1957, 55th Leg., R.S., Ch. 286, eff. Aug. 21, 1957; Bush v. Martin, 224 F. Supp. 499 (S.D. Tex. 1963); aff'd per curiam, Martin v. Bush, 376 U.S. 222 (1964).
1966
(House Bill 67, 59th Leg., Regular Session)
23 Acts 1965, 59th Leg., R.S., Ch. 349, eff. Aug. 30, 1965.
1968, 1970
(Senate Bill 335, 60th Leg., Regular Session)
23 Acts 1967, 60th Leg., R.S., Ch. 342, eff. Aug. 28, 1967; Bush v. Martin, 251 F. Supp. 484 (S.D. Tex. 1966).
1972
(Senate Bill 1, 62nd Leg., 1st Called Session)
24 Acts 1971, 62nd Leg. 1st C.S., Ch. 12, eff. Sep. 3, 1971.
1974
(As Ordered by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, October 17, 1973)
24 White v. Weiser, --- F. Supp. --- (N.D. Tex. 1973); PLAN B
1976‐1980
(House Bill 1065, 64th Leg., Regular Session)
24 Acts 1975, 64th Leg., R.S., Ch. 538, eff. Sep. 1, 1975.
1982
(Senate Bill 1, 67th Leg., 1st Called Session (1981), as Modified by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, February 27, 1982)
27 Acts 1981, 67th Leg., 1st C.S., Ch. 2, eff. Nov. 10, 1981; Seamon v. Upham, 536 F. Supp. 931, 958 (E.D. Tex. 1982).
1984‐1990
(Senate Bill 480, 68th Leg., Regular Session)
27 Acts 1983, 68th Leg., R.S., Ch. 531, eff. Jun. 19, 1983.
1992‐1994, 1996 Primaries
(House Bill 1, 72nd Leg., 2nd Called Session)
30 Acts 1991, 72nd Leg., 2nd C.S., Ch. 7, eff. Nov. 24, 1991; Vera v. Richards, 861 F. Supp. 1304 (S.D. Tex. 1994); Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952 (1996); Vera v. Bush, 933 F. Supp. 1341 (S.D. Tex. 1996); PLANC657
1996 Special and General Elections and 1998‐2000 Elections
(As Ordered by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, August 6, 1996)
30 Vera v. Bush, 933 F. Supp. 1341 (S.D. Tex. 1996); Vera v. Bush, 980 F. Supp. 254 (S.D. Tex. 1997); PLANC746
2002
(As Ordered by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, November 14, 2001)
32 Balderas v. State of Texas, --- F. Supp. --- (E.D. Tex. 2001); PLAN01151C
2004 Elections and 2006 Primaries
(House Bill 3, 78th Leg., 3rd Called Session)
32 Acts 2003, 78th Leg., 3rd C.S., Ch. 2, eff. Jan. 11, 2004; PLAN01374C
2006 Special and General Elections to 2010
(As Ordered by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, August 4, 2006)
32 Lulac v. Perry, 457 F. Supp. 2d 716 (E.D. Tex. 2006); PLAN01440C