Maryland Judge Blocks Progressive Redistricting Reform from November Ballot
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A Maryland circuit court judge has temporarily halted a constitutional amendment that would have modernized congressional redistricting, citing procedural technicalities. The decision, which delays much-needed reform, is pending appeal.
On Wednesday, a Maryland circuit court judge sided with entrenched interests by ruling that a proposed constitutional amendment—designed to bring fairness and transparency to congressional redistricting—will not appear on the November 2026 ballot. The judge’s decision, which is paused to allow an appeal to the state Supreme Court, was based on claims that lawmakers missed an arbitrary July 1 deadline for submitting ballot summaries and that the amendment’s language was supposedly misleading.
The amendment, which had been advanced by Democratic legislators seeking to end gerrymandering and promote equitable representation, would have limited the requirement for compact districts and natural boundaries to state legislative districts only. This would have allowed for more flexible, inclusive congressional maps, including those crossing the Chesapeake Bay, and opened the door to fairer representation ahead of the 2028 elections—potentially challenging the seat of Republican Rep. Andy Harris, a staunch opponent of reform.
Judge Robert Thompson justified his ruling by invoking procedural technicalities and arguing that the measure conflicted with a single-issue limitation in the state constitution, due to a provision granting the state Supreme Court original jurisdiction over redistricting lawsuits. He wrote, "> The court has no choice but to enjoin the board of elections from including ballot Question 3 on the general election ballot for November 3, 2026."
This ruling echoes a similar anti-democratic move by the Virginia Supreme Court, which also struck down a redistricting measure on procedural grounds. Both states are closely watching California, where voters recently approved a progressive amendment allowing mid-decade redistricting—a model that could finally break the stranglehold of partisan gerrymandering if adopted elsewhere.