Colorado court rejects November ballot initiatives aimed at redrawing congressional districts

Colorado voters will not get a say this November on whether to replace the state’s congressional districts with ones that could help Democrats win additional seats in future elections.

The state Supreme Court on Monday struck down a series of proposed ballot initiatives that would have sidestepped the state’s independent redistricting commission and authorized new U.S. House districts for the 2028 and 2030 elections. The court said the measures addressed multiple subjects in violation of the state constitution.

The rulings marked another setback for Democrats in a nationwide redistricting battle that could affect control of Congress. Earlier this year, courts also invalidated Democratic redistricting efforts in Virginia and New York that were aimed at the midterm elections, though Democrats could try again there before the 2028 elections. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court weakened federal Voting Rights Act protections for people of color, opening a pathway for Republicans in several Southern states to redraw majority-Black districts that had elected Democrats.

Redistricting is typically done immediately after a census at the start of each decade.

President Donald Trump kickstarted an unusual mid-decade redistricting fight last year when he called on Republicans in Texas to redraw congressional districts in a bid to win several additional seats in the midterms and hold on to control of the closely divided chamber. Other Republican-led states followed, and several Democratic-led states tried to counter. Republicans prevailed in more states with new districts that they hope could net as many as 10 additional seats in November.

Colorado’s U.S. House delegation is evenly split between four Democrats and four Republicans under a map drawn by the state’s independent redistricting commission after the 2020 census. A constitutional amendment would be needed to draw different districts before the next census.

A Democratic-backed amendment would have authorized mid-decade redistricting and created new districts that could have helped Democrats gain up to three seats. Supporters offered two options: a single amendment combining both proposals, and a pair of initiatives separating redistricting authorization from the new map that would take effect only if both passed. The Colorado Supreme Court said both versions violated the multi-subject prohibition.

The court cited the same grounds while also invalidating identical Republican-backed ballot initiatives submitted to counter the Democratic ones.