The big State House story for the League in 2026 has been midterm redistricting.

We have won several battles this year, but the war for fair representation will almost certainly continue in the new legislative session that begins in January 2027. 

Gerrymandering is an attack on representative democracy. The intent of a gerrymandered map is to enhance the impact of some voters while diminishing the impact of others for the advantage of preferred candidates (usually incumbents) and parties. 

The voting rights of all citizens, regardless of race or gender, have been protected by the 14th, 15th, and 19th Amendments to the Constitution, along with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). However, Chief Justice John Roberts and his colleagues in the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) majority have crippled attempts to require genuinely representative maps in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (2024), and most recently in Louisana v. Callais (2026). It is this last decision that truly gutted Section 2 of the VRA and triggered the unprecedented effort at mid-cycle redistricting. 

It is important to emphasize that these SCOTUS rulings do not define gerrymandering as a positive good for the republic. It has simply been found to be non-justiciable, a very different thing.

So, what has happened in South Carolina? 

We began in 2026 with H.4717, a congressional map drawn up in Washington that was introduced by Representative Pace and others. The map was drawn to attempt to yield 7 Republican districts by eliminating the Democratic majority in District 6 (CD6), a district originally designed in 1990 to satisfy the VRA. We opposed this bill as an attack on the rights of voters to fair representation (our testimony is on lwvsc.org). There were other perspectives. A concern expressed by some was that “unpacking” CD6 would backfire by diluting Republican majorities in adjacent districts, making them potentially competitive for Democrats. 

And then there was quiet in South Carolina until the Callais decision in April gave states with VRA districts an opening to claim that under Callais, racially defined VRA districts are no longer regarded as constitutional.This rationale cannot be applied to the South Carolina congressional map which was explicitly ruled a partisan gerrymander by SCOTUS in the Alexander decision. In the 3 redistricting cycles since 1990, CD6 has been repeatedly packed with Democratic voters regardless of race to protect Republican majorities in adjacent districts. It is now largely defined by partisan, not racial, interests.

Nevertheless, the effort to redraw the South Carolina map moved forward under pressure from the Trump administration, this time as H.5683 introduced by Representative Luke Rankin. This bill once more featured a map drawn in Washington without regard for legitimate redistricting criteria and planned to move the primary for congressional seats to August. Existing votes for those offices during the normal primary elections would be discarded. The bill was heard in subcommittee and full committee on 5/12 and the floor debate began on 5/15.

As hundreds of amendments were contemplated by opponents, the House Rules Committee met with 8 minutes public notice to rescind the rule requiring that all amendments on redistricting bills be heard. The LWV, represented by Kathleen McDaniel of Burnette, Schutt, & McDaniel, filed for an injunction alleging violation of the state Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) because of the inadequate notice of this meeting. Judge Daniel Coble denied the injunction, raising important issues that deserve fuller consideration. 

H.5683 was moving so late in the normal legislative session that there were attempts to put redistricting into the Sine Die resolution that defines what can be done after the 2nd Thursday in May. Under a requirement of 2/3 of those voting, this effort passed the House on 5/6 but failed on 5/12 in the Senate. 

At this point Governor McMaster called the General Assembly back in Special Session effective on the 2nd Friday in May, allowing the Senate to take up the House bill. After a rushed Senate Judiciary hearing on 5/20, the bill was passed on to the Senate floor where debate began on 5/21. 

The League and its advocacy partners on this issue reached out to voters in crucial regions through radio and text, asking them to call their senators to reject this bill. We pointed out that thousands of overseas military ballots had already been received and would be discarded, a slap in the face to those deployed to serve our nation. Voters responded and senators listened. 

There were 2 attempts to obtain the 3/5 floor vote needed to waive Senate Rule 15b which mandated 2 days between each reading (and thus between the 2 required floor votes) of the bill. The attempt to waive 15b failed, making it inevitable that 3rd reading – required for passage – could not occur before 5/26, when early in-person voting for the primaries began.

Quite a few senators who voted for the bill on 2nd reading were unwilling to throw out thousands of in person votes that had already been cast on that first day of early voting. Adding to the potential for disruptive overlap with regular voting, it was also known in the Senate that several lawsuits to stop this last-minute change were planned, including one by the League. This added to the potential for even more delays and discarded ballots as implementation of redistricting might be tied up in court, regardless of the final outcome. With additional “No” votes because of this, the bill failed 3rd reading and died on 5/26 – only 12 working days after it began its journey through the Assembly. 

What issues contributed to this defeat of H.5683 Midterm Redistricting?

Time was on our side, but there were very diverse reasons cited by legislators opposing the bill. One very conservative House member wrote in his constituent newsletter that he questioned whether it was fair to design a map that would give 60% of the state’s voters 100% of the congressional representation. He was right to question this. It is not fair. 

Senator Shane Massey gave a remarkable and principled floor speech on 5/12 in opposition to adding redistricting to the Sine Die resolution in which he recognized the importance of a healthy minority party to good government in South Carolina and in our representation in Washington. Like some other senators, he noted that if South Carolina is represented by members of only one party, it will often be at a disadvantage in Congress and with the President. Even more pragmatically, some senators acknowledged (as some House leaders had before them) that the proposed redistricting did not guarantee an all Republican US House delegation but could instead easily produce a 5 Rep/2 Dem delegation. 

The League appreciates all legislators who voted against midterm redistricting at every stage, but we would like to especially recognize those senators who voted against giving the bill second reading on 5/23: Allen, Bennett, Campsen, Davis, Devine, Graham, Hembree, Hutto, Jackson, Massey, Matthews, Ott, Rankin, Sabb, Stubbs, Sutton, Tedder and Walker. Their constituents should reach out to thank them.

We also thank the thousands of voters who mobilized to speak out, and to vote, when it mattered.

2026 is not the end.

The issue will resurface in 2027, probably including redistricting not just congressional but also South Carolina House and Senate maps. Stay tuned to mobilize for this truly central issue in protecting representative democracy.

We must work together with renewed energy because these issues are certain to continue to threaten the foundations of our representative democracy.

~Lynn Shuler Teague, LWVSC Lobbyist

Thank you to the donors who designated more than $7,000 in contributions to LWVSC Action during and after June1 Legislative Update Zoom call!