Table of Contents

Gerrymandering represents one of the most significant threats to fair representation in American democracy. When maps are gerrymandered, politicians and the powerful choose voters instead of voters choosing politicians. This manipulation of electoral district boundaries undermines the fundamental principle that every citizen's vote should carry equal weight. Partisan gerrymandering does more than distort representation in Congress—it undermines the belief that elections are fair, a cornerstone of democratic legitimacy.

While gerrymandering has existed since the founding of the nation, it's becoming a bigger threat than ever. The Brennan Center estimates that gerrymandering gave Republicans an advantage of around 16 House seats in the 2024 race to control Congress compared to fair maps. This systematic manipulation of district boundaries has real consequences for governance, policy, and the health of our democratic institutions.

Citizens who understand the scope of this problem and take action can make a meaningful difference. By holding elected officials accountable, supporting reform efforts, and engaging in the redistricting process, ordinary Americans can help restore fairness to our electoral system. This comprehensive guide provides the knowledge and tools you need to become an effective advocate for fair redistricting in your community and state.

Understanding Gerrymandering: What It Is and Why It Matters

The Basics of Redistricting

Every 10 years, after the census, states redraw the boundaries of congressional and state legislative districts to reflect population changes, a process known as redistricting. This constitutional requirement ensures that representation remains proportional as populations shift and grow. When conducted fairly, redistricting creates districts that accurately reflect the demographic and political composition of communities.

Redistricting also is a chance for those in control of the process to rig maps to favor certain candidates or political parties, a practice known as partisan gerrymandering. The term "gerrymandering" dates back to 1812, when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry approved a district map that included a salamander-shaped district designed to benefit his political party.

How Gerrymandering Works

Gerrymandering relies on two primary tactics that manipulate voter distribution across districts. The first, called "packing," crams opposition voters into as few districts as possible. Those voters win their handful of districts by landslide margins, but their influence everywhere else disappears.

The second tactic, "cracking," does the opposite: it scatters opposition voters across many districts so they never reach a majority in any of them. By strategically combining these two approaches, mapmakers can engineer electoral outcomes that bear little relationship to the actual political preferences of voters across a state.

Modern technology has made gerrymandering more precise and more damaging than ever before. Sophisticated mapping software and detailed voter data allow partisan mapmakers to predict electoral outcomes with remarkable accuracy, creating districts that virtually guarantee predetermined results.

The Consequences for Democracy

The result is skewed, unrepresentative maps where electoral outcomes are virtually guaranteed, even when voters' preferences at the polls shift dramatically. In extreme cases, the party drawing the maps may even be able to win a majority of seats even though it wins only a minority of the vote.

By some projections, more than 80 percent of U.S. House seats in 2026 are already functionally decided before a single ballot is cast. In the 2024 cycle, the average margin of victory in House races was 27 points, and dozens of seats went completely uncontested. This lack of competition fundamentally changes the nature of representation.

Gerrymandering entrenches incumbents by design, converting general elections into "safe" seats and shifting accountability to narrow primaries. When districts are engineered to be noncompetitive in November, the decisive contest moves to low-turnout primaries, where smaller, less representative electorates set the outcome.

Gerrymandering leads to less choice, less representation for voters, and less accountability for politicians. It also produces more polarization, as party primary voters rather than general election voters have the loudest say. When representatives only need to appeal to their party's base in safe districts, they have little incentive to compromise or work across party lines.

The Erosion of Public Trust

Survey data from tens of thousands of voters in the 2020 and 2022 elections show that Americans view gerrymandering with the same disdain they reserve for bribery and other blatant forms of political corruption. This perception has serious consequences for democratic legitimacy.

Gerrymandering contributes to the erosion of public confidence in elections. It lessens people's sense that change can happen, and reduces the ability of voters to hold leaders accountable. When citizens believe the system is rigged, they become less likely to participate and less likely to trust government institutions.

Recognizing Gerrymandering in Your State

Visual Indicators of Gerrymandered Districts

One of the most obvious signs of gerrymandering is district shape. While not all oddly shaped districts are gerrymandered, and not all gerrymandered districts look unusual, bizarre boundaries often indicate manipulation. Look for districts with:

  • Extremely irregular or convoluted boundaries that snake through communities
  • Narrow corridors connecting distant population centers
  • Districts that split cities, counties, or neighborhoods in seemingly arbitrary ways
  • Boundaries that follow no logical geographic, municipal, or community lines

Statistical Measures of Partisan Bias

Partisan gerrymandering can be measured using the "Efficiency Gap" to show how much maps favor one party. It compares each party's "wasted votes" across all districts in a state. If one party consistently wastes far fewer votes than the other, the map boundaries are giving it a systematic advantage.

Other warning signs include:

  • A significant disparity between statewide vote share and seat share for political parties
  • Very few competitive districts where either party could realistically win
  • Districts where one party consistently wins by overwhelming margins while the other party wins narrowly
  • Maps that produce dramatically different outcomes than previous maps despite minimal population changes

Recent Examples of Extreme Gerrymandering

Maps in Texas and Florida are especially skewed, but North Carolina provides one of the most striking examples of the power of gerrymandering to affect the balance of power, not only in a state but nationally. After the 2024 election, North Carolina saw three Democratic districts flip to Republicans, enough to give control of the U.S. House to the GOP by a slim margin.

Democrats in Illinois boldly redrew their state's congressional map to reduce Republicans to holding just 3 of 17 seats, the fewest number of Republican seats since the Civil War. By contrast, the Brennan Center estimates that a fair Illinois map would have around 6 GOP seats. This demonstrates that gerrymandering is not exclusively a problem of one party, though the scale and impact vary significantly by state.

Understanding Your State's Redistricting Process

To effectively advocate for fair maps, you need to understand how redistricting works in your state. Research the following:

  • Who draws the maps: the state legislature, an independent commission, or a hybrid system
  • What criteria mapmakers must follow under state law or constitution
  • Whether your state has any anti-gerrymandering provisions
  • The timeline for redistricting and opportunities for public input
  • Whether state courts can review maps for partisan fairness

In 26 states, politicians are in total control of drawing maps. In 18 states, some kind of redistricting commission draws the maps. Understanding which category your state falls into will help you determine the most effective advocacy strategies.

Federal Court Decisions on Gerrymandering

In 2019, in Rucho v. Common Cause, the Court refused to adopt any standard to police partisan gerrymandering, and it even prevented federal courts from hearing that claim. Fast-forward through a census, six years of line-drawing, and a flurry of lawsuits, and predictably, our democracy has become much less fair.

The Supreme Court has said federal courts won't referee claims of pure partisan gerrymandering. That leaves a large gray zone and a perpetual arms race where the rules depend on who holds power unless states adopt durable guardrails themselves. This decision shifted the battleground for fighting gerrymandering from federal courts to state courts and legislatures.

State Constitutional Protections

While federal courts have largely stepped back from policing partisan gerrymandering, many state courts remain active in this area. Some state constitutions contain provisions that prohibit partisan gerrymandering or require fair representation. State supreme courts in Pennsylvania, North Carolina (before a subsequent reversal), and other states have struck down gerrymandered maps under state constitutional provisions.

However, the legal landscape remains unstable. After the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down the state's 2021 congressional map as an impermissible partisan gerrymander under the state constitution, the court put in place a map drawn by court-appointed experts. But then, after changes to the composition of the state supreme court, the court reversed its recent ruling and said it would no longer police partisan gerrymandering.

Racial Gerrymandering Remains Illegal

While partisan gerrymandering currently faces few federal legal constraints, racial gerrymandering remains prohibited under the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. When race and party affiliation are closely correlated—which they are in much of the country—a map that looks like a racial gerrymander can also look like a partisan one.

In 2024, the Supreme Court addressed this overlap, holding that when partisanship and race are intertwined, courts should presume that legislatures acted in good faith. Challengers bear the burden of proving that race, not partisanship, was the predominant factor driving the district lines. That's a high bar to clear, and it means some maps that disproportionately harm minority voters survive legal challenge.

Mid-Decade Redistricting

A troubling recent development involves states redrawing maps in the middle of the decade, outside the normal post-census redistricting cycle. Earlier this year, Texas abruptly drew new congressional maps in a gambit to squeeze out five extra seats for Republicans. It was in the middle of the decade and at the behest of someone who doesn't live there (President Trump)—and all at the expense of Black and Latino voters. Even though 95 percent of population growth in the state came from those communities, the map's main feature was fewer districts where those voters can elect their preferred candidates.

Taking Action: How to Hold Officials Accountable

Educate Yourself and Others

Knowledge is the foundation of effective advocacy. Before you can hold officials accountable, you need to thoroughly understand the issue and be able to explain it to others. Start by:

  • Studying your state's current district maps and comparing them to previous maps
  • Reading analyses from nonpartisan organizations about your state's redistricting
  • Understanding the specific legal framework governing redistricting in your state
  • Learning about successful reform efforts in other states
  • Following redistricting news and litigation in your state

Share what you learn with friends, family, neighbors, and colleagues. Gerrymandering can seem like a complex, technical issue, but its effects on representation and accountability are straightforward. Help others understand how gerrymandering affects their ability to hold elected officials accountable and have their voices heard.

Participate in Public Hearings and Comment Periods

Most states provide opportunities for public input during the redistricting process. These may include:

  • Public hearings held by the legislature or redistricting commission
  • Written comment periods where citizens can submit feedback on proposed maps
  • Online portals where residents can draw and submit their own proposed maps
  • Community meetings organized by local officials or advocacy groups

Attend these hearings in person when possible, or submit written testimony if you cannot attend. Be specific in your comments. Rather than making general statements about fairness, point to specific aspects of proposed maps that concern you, such as communities that have been split or districts with suspicious shapes.

Bring others with you. Officials pay more attention when they see significant public engagement. Coordinate with neighbors and community organizations to ensure strong turnout at public hearings.

Contact Your Elected Representatives

Direct communication with elected officials can be surprisingly effective, especially when many constituents raise the same concerns. Contact your state legislators, governor, and members of Congress to:

  • Express your concerns about gerrymandering and demand fair redistricting
  • Urge support for independent redistricting commissions
  • Ask them to oppose partisan gerrymandering regardless of which party benefits
  • Request transparency in the redistricting process
  • Demand that they prioritize keeping communities together in district maps

Be persistent. A single email or phone call is unlikely to change a legislator's position, but sustained pressure from many constituents over time can influence decision-making. Follow up on your initial contacts and continue to engage throughout the redistricting process.

Use multiple communication channels: phone calls, emails, social media, letters to the editor, and in-person meetings at town halls or district offices. Each method has advantages, and using a variety of approaches increases the likelihood your message will be heard.

Leverage Social Media and Traditional Media

Public pressure works best when it's visible. Use social media platforms to:

  • Share information about gerrymandering in your state
  • Highlight specific examples of unfair districting
  • Publicize upcoming hearings and opportunities for public input
  • Tag elected officials in posts calling for fair redistricting
  • Amplify the voices of advocacy organizations working on this issue

Don't neglect traditional media. Write letters to the editor of local newspapers, contact local news stations about covering redistricting issues, and offer to provide expert commentary or personal stories about how gerrymandering affects your community.

Vote with Redistricting in Mind

Make redistricting reform a voting issue. When evaluating candidates for state legislature, governor, state supreme court, and other offices, ask about their positions on gerrymandering and redistricting reform. Support candidates who:

  • Pledge to support independent redistricting commissions
  • Commit to transparency in the redistricting process
  • Promise to oppose partisan gerrymandering regardless of which party benefits
  • Support state constitutional amendments to establish fair redistricting criteria

Remember that state legislative elections and state supreme court races often receive less attention than federal races, but these officials have direct control over redistricting in most states. Your vote in these races can have an outsized impact on redistricting outcomes.

Support Litigation Efforts

When states enact gerrymandered maps, litigation is often necessary to challenge them. While you may not be able to file a lawsuit yourself, you can support these efforts by:

  • Donating to legal organizations that challenge gerrymandered maps
  • Serving as a plaintiff if you live in an affected district and organizations are seeking plaintiffs
  • Providing testimony or evidence about how gerrymandering affects your community
  • Attending court hearings to show public support for fair maps
  • Publicizing ongoing litigation to keep pressure on officials

As of April 2026, there are live litigation challenges to federal or state legislative lines in 14 states. There are pending fights over congressional lines in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. If you live in one of these states, look for opportunities to support these legal challenges.

Supporting Redistricting Reform

Independent Redistricting Commissions

An Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) is a body separate from the legislature that is responsible for drawing the districts used in congressional and state legislative elections. The most widely adopted reform is taking the redistricting pen out of legislators' hands entirely.

To date, 7 states—Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, and Washington State—have created independent citizen-redistricting commissions that are responsible for drawing boundaries of electoral districts in a way that does not give any one political party an unfair advantage.

The structure of IRCs vary from state to state, but IRCs are meant to make the redistricting process more transparent and impartial by establishing standards for who can serve on the commission and criteria that must be followed when drawing district maps. Effective IRCs require the commissioners to adhere to strict criteria, such as complying with federal and state constitutions, equal population, protecting language and racial minorities, partisan fairness, compactness, and contiguity, among others.

Key Features of Effective Commissions

Not all redistricting commissions are equally effective at preventing gerrymandering. When advocating for commission-based reform, push for commissions that include:

  • True independence: Commission members should be prohibited from holding elected office, working for political parties, or serving as lobbyists
  • Balanced composition: The commission should include members from both major parties and independent or unaffiliated voters
  • Transparent processes: All meetings should be public, and all data and proposed maps should be publicly available
  • Public participation: The commission should hold hearings throughout the state and accept public input
  • Clear criteria: The commission should follow explicit, legally binding criteria that prioritize communities of interest, compactness, and partisan fairness
  • Supermajority requirements: Requiring supermajority approval can prevent one party from dominating the process

Effective IRCs also require the commission to hold public hearings, make the data being used to draw maps publicly available, accept public comments, and allow voters to submit maps to the commission online.

The Constitutional Status of Independent Commissions

In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission that redistricting commissions such as Arizona's, whose redistricting commission process is independent of the state legislature, were constitutional. This decision cleared the way for states to adopt independent commissions without fear of federal constitutional challenges.

How to Establish a Commission in Your State

Creating an independent redistricting commission typically requires either a state constitutional amendment or legislation. The most common paths include:

  • Ballot initiatives: In states with citizen initiative processes, advocates can collect signatures to place a redistricting reform measure on the ballot
  • Legislative action: State legislatures can pass laws or propose constitutional amendments establishing commissions
  • Constitutional conventions: Some states periodically hold constitutional conventions that can consider redistricting reforms

In 2018, voters in four states—Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, and Utah—approved ballot measures creating IRCs, and Ohio also passed a bipartisan redistricting reform measure. These successful campaigns demonstrate that voters across the political spectrum support fair redistricting when given the opportunity to vote on it directly.

Other Reform Approaches

While independent commissions represent the gold standard for redistricting reform, other approaches can also improve fairness:

  • Advisory commissions: These bodies draw maps but the legislature retains final approval authority
  • Backup commissions: Some states use commissions only if the legislature fails to pass a redistricting plan
  • Nonpartisan staff processes: Iowa uses a unique system where nonpartisan legislative staff draw maps according to strict criteria, with limited legislative input
  • Stronger state constitutional requirements: Even without commissions, states can adopt constitutional provisions that limit gerrymandering
  • Judicial review: Ensuring that state courts can review maps for partisan fairness provides an important check

Federal Legislation

In 2022, Congress nearly passed the Freedom to Vote Act, a landmark package of democracy reforms that included a prohibition on partisan gerrymandering in the drawing of congressional districts. The transformative bill passed the House and had majority support in the Senate. It stalled only because the Senate failed by two votes to modify the chamber's archaic filibuster rules.

Congress has the constitutional power to enact national redistricting rules that would ban partisan gerrymandering, bar mid-decade redistricting, and ensure fair representation for voters across the country. Advocate for federal legislation by contacting your U.S. senators and representatives and urging them to support redistricting reform bills.

Joining and Supporting Advocacy Organizations

National Organizations Working on Redistricting Reform

Numerous organizations work on redistricting reform at the national and state levels. Consider supporting and getting involved with groups such as:

  • Common Cause: Works on redistricting reform and has state chapters across the country
  • The Brennan Center for Justice: Conducts research, litigation, and advocacy on redistricting and voting rights
  • FairVote: Advocates for electoral reforms including fair redistricting
  • Campaign Legal Center: Litigates redistricting cases and advocates for reform
  • RepresentUs: Works on anti-corruption reforms including redistricting
  • League of Women Voters: Has long advocated for fair redistricting and has active state and local chapters

These organizations offer various ways to get involved, from volunteering for campaigns to donating to support litigation and advocacy efforts. Many also provide educational resources to help you understand redistricting in your state.

State and Local Groups

In addition to national organizations, many states have local groups focused specifically on redistricting reform in their state. These groups often have the most detailed knowledge of local redistricting processes and the most direct relationships with state officials. Search for redistricting reform organizations in your state and consider:

  • Attending meetings and events
  • Volunteering for campaigns to establish independent commissions
  • Helping with signature gathering for ballot initiatives
  • Participating in lobby days at your state capitol
  • Serving as a spokesperson or sharing your story about how gerrymandering affects your community

Building Coalitions

Redistricting reform succeeds when it brings together diverse coalitions. Look for opportunities to work with groups across the political spectrum. Fair redistricting should not be a partisan issue—voters of all political persuasions benefit from competitive districts and accountable representatives.

Build coalitions that include:

  • Good government groups
  • Civil rights organizations
  • Community organizations representing affected populations
  • Business groups concerned about political dysfunction
  • Faith-based organizations
  • Student groups and young voter organizations
  • Veterans organizations

Broad-based coalitions are more effective at applying pressure on officials and more likely to succeed in passing reforms.

Monitoring and Responding to Redistricting

Staying Informed About the Redistricting Timeline

Redistricting typically occurs once per decade following the census, but the specific timeline varies by state. Some states begin the process immediately after census data is released, while others take longer. Additionally, as recent events have shown, some states attempt mid-decade redistricting.

Stay informed about:

  • When your state plans to begin redistricting
  • Key deadlines for public input
  • When proposed maps will be released
  • When final votes on maps are scheduled
  • Any litigation challenging adopted maps

Sign up for email alerts from advocacy organizations and government agencies involved in redistricting to ensure you don't miss important opportunities to participate.

Analyzing Proposed Maps

When proposed maps are released, analyze them carefully. Many advocacy organizations and academic institutions provide tools and analyses to help citizens evaluate proposed maps. Look for:

  • How the maps compare to current maps in terms of competitiveness
  • Whether communities of interest have been kept together or split
  • Statistical measures of partisan bias
  • How the maps affect minority voting strength
  • Whether districts follow natural boundaries or appear manipulated

Don't rely solely on your own analysis. Consult analyses from nonpartisan experts and organizations to get a complete picture of how proposed maps would affect representation.

Rapid Response to Unfair Maps

When unfair maps are proposed or adopted, time is of the essence. Organize rapid response efforts that include:

  • Immediate public statements from community leaders and organizations
  • Coordinated social media campaigns
  • Protests and demonstrations at the state capitol
  • Emergency meetings with elected officials
  • Media outreach to publicize the problems with proposed maps
  • Preparation for potential litigation

Have a plan in place before maps are released so you can respond quickly if necessary.

Long-Term Strategies for Systemic Change

Building Sustained Movements

Redistricting reform requires sustained effort over many years. A single campaign or election cycle is rarely sufficient to achieve meaningful change. Build a long-term movement by:

  • Maintaining organizational infrastructure between redistricting cycles
  • Continuing to educate the public about gerrymandering even when redistricting is not imminent
  • Building relationships with elected officials and candidates over time
  • Developing leadership within your community to ensure continuity
  • Celebrating incremental victories while keeping focus on ultimate goals

Changing Political Culture

Ultimately, ending gerrymandering requires changing the political culture around redistricting. Work to create an environment where:

  • Voters expect and demand fair maps regardless of which party controls the process
  • Politicians face electoral consequences for supporting gerrymandering
  • Media routinely covers redistricting as a major issue
  • Fair redistricting is seen as a core democratic value, not a partisan issue
  • Officials who support fair maps are recognized and rewarded

Investing in Civic Education

Many Americans don't understand how redistricting works or why it matters. Support efforts to improve civic education about redistricting in schools and communities. This might include:

  • Developing curriculum materials about redistricting for schools
  • Hosting community education events
  • Creating accessible online resources explaining redistricting
  • Training community leaders to educate others about the issue
  • Partnering with libraries, community centers, and other institutions to reach broad audiences

Learning from Success Stories

Independent redistricting commissions offer one way to rebuild trust. California's voter-approved commission has earned praise for removing the process from the hands of lawmakers. Study successful reform efforts in states like California, Michigan, Colorado, and Arizona to understand what strategies worked and how they can be adapted to your state.

Redistricting reforms creating independent redistricting commissions resulted in fairer maps, while less robust reforms struggled. This evidence demonstrates that well-designed reforms can make a real difference.

Overcoming Common Obstacles

Addressing Partisan Resistance

The biggest obstacle to redistricting reform is often resistance from the political party that currently benefits from gerrymandering. Overcome this resistance by:

  • Framing reform as a good-government issue, not a partisan one
  • Pointing out that political fortunes change and today's beneficiaries may be tomorrow's victims
  • Building bipartisan coalitions that include members of both parties
  • Using ballot initiatives to bypass resistant legislatures when possible
  • Highlighting how gerrymandering contributes to polarization and dysfunction that hurts everyone

Countering Misinformation

Opponents of redistricting reform often spread misinformation about proposed reforms. Common false claims include:

  • That independent commissions are unaccountable or undemocratic
  • That reform efforts are secretly partisan attempts to benefit one party
  • That current maps are already fair
  • That redistricting reform is too complicated or expensive

Counter these claims with facts, data, and examples from states where reforms have succeeded. Prepare fact sheets and talking points that advocates can use to respond to misinformation.

Maintaining Momentum

Redistricting reform campaigns can take years, and it's easy for supporters to lose momentum. Maintain energy by:

  • Celebrating small victories along the way
  • Regularly communicating with supporters about progress
  • Providing concrete actions people can take at each stage
  • Sharing stories of how gerrymandering affects real people
  • Connecting redistricting reform to other issues people care about

Dealing with Setbacks

Reform efforts will inevitably face setbacks. During the November 2024 elections, Ohio voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have established a citizen-led redistricting commission to replace an existing system that repeatedly produced unconstitutional maps. The defeat was partly related to confusing language—the ballot question stated that the new commission would be required to gerrymander district boundaries, whereas the constitutional amendment itself indicated the opposite.

Learn from setbacks and use them to improve future efforts. Analyze what went wrong, adjust strategies, and try again. Despite these setbacks, the effort to establish independent citizen-redistricting commissions and reduce partisan gerrymandering is far from over.

Resources and Tools for Advocates

Online Mapping Tools

Several organizations provide online tools that allow citizens to draw their own redistricting maps and analyze existing maps:

  • Dave's Redistricting App
  • DistrictBuilder
  • Representable
  • State-specific mapping tools provided by redistricting commissions

These tools help you understand the redistricting process and create alternative maps that demonstrate how fairer districts could be drawn.

Data and Research Resources

Access to quality data and research is essential for effective advocacy. Useful resources include:

  • The Brennan Center for Justice's redistricting research and reports
  • All About Redistricting from the Loyola Law School
  • The Princeton Gerrymandering Project
  • FiveThirtyEight's redistricting coverage and analysis
  • State-specific data from university research centers

Understanding the legal framework for redistricting helps advocates make more effective arguments. Consult:

  • Your state constitution's provisions on redistricting
  • State statutes governing the redistricting process
  • Recent court decisions on redistricting in your state
  • Legal analyses from organizations like the Campaign Legal Center

Communication and Organizing Tools

Effective advocacy requires good communication and organization. Use tools like:

  • Social media platforms to spread information and organize supporters
  • Email and text messaging platforms for coordinating actions
  • Online petition platforms to demonstrate public support
  • Video conferencing tools for virtual meetings and trainings
  • Project management tools to coordinate complex campaigns

Making Your Voice Heard: Practical Action Steps

Immediate Actions You Can Take Today

  • Research who draws the maps in your state and when the next redistricting will occur
  • Sign up for email alerts from redistricting reform organizations
  • Follow your state legislators and governor on social media
  • Join at least one organization working on redistricting reform
  • Share information about gerrymandering with your social networks
  • Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper about redistricting

Short-Term Actions (Next Few Months)

  • Attend a public hearing or community meeting about redistricting
  • Meet with your state legislators to discuss redistricting reform
  • Organize a community education event about gerrymandering
  • Volunteer with a redistricting reform campaign
  • Donate to organizations working on redistricting litigation and advocacy
  • Recruit friends and neighbors to join you in advocacy efforts

Long-Term Commitments

  • Make redistricting reform a priority in your voting decisions
  • Join the board or leadership team of a redistricting reform organization
  • Become a spokesperson or expert on redistricting in your community
  • Help organize a ballot initiative campaign for redistricting reform
  • Mentor others who want to get involved in redistricting advocacy
  • Stay engaged between redistricting cycles to maintain momentum

The Path Forward: Why Your Involvement Matters

Gerrymandering represents a fundamental threat to democratic accountability and fair representation. Democracy is a promise that power originates from the people and can be reclaimed by them. Accountability is how that promise is kept. Without it, elections are merely a formality, and representation is simply a label, not a reality.

The good news is that change is possible. In many states, maps are much fairer than after the 2010 census, when single-party control of the redistricting process gave partisan line drawers free rein to craft some of the most extreme gerrymanders in American history. This redistricting cycle has seen notable improvement. These improvements didn't happen by accident—they resulted from sustained advocacy by citizens who demanded fair maps.

Your involvement makes a difference. When citizens engage in the redistricting process, attend hearings, contact officials, support reform efforts, and vote with redistricting in mind, they create pressure for change. Officials respond to sustained public engagement, especially when it comes from diverse coalitions that cross partisan lines.

The fight against gerrymandering is not easy, and progress is often slow. But the stakes are too high to give up. Fair redistricting is essential for ensuring that every vote counts equally, that representatives are accountable to their constituents, and that our democracy functions as it should.

By taking action today—educating yourself and others, participating in the redistricting process, supporting reform efforts, and holding officials accountable—you can help create a more fair and representative democracy for all Americans. The power to end gerrymandering ultimately rests with engaged citizens who refuse to accept a rigged system and who demand that their voices be heard.

For more information on voting rights and electoral reform, visit the Brennan Center for Justice, Common Cause, the Campaign Legal Center, FairVote, and League of Women Voters.