SCOTUS says the federal district court should have taken GOP mapping into account. (Corrected blog below; it's SCOTUS, not the original court, doing the hearing.)
A new hearing is set for Jan. 9, by the nine in black.
So, should we expect a delayed primary? And, wouldn't that affect the presidential primary, too?
I would think the Supreme Court would be able to give a more-than-cursory glance, address the discrimination claims-related issues, hopefully stand with lower courts on findings of discrimination, make some halfway concessions in a few districts, wrap up its ruling in appropriate language, and get that all done in a week. Nonetheless, between that, and appeals, we are probably looking at a push-back to later than March 6.
And, since the Supremes decided to hear all the redistricting cases themselves, rather than remanding them, the hoped-for resolution in the above paragraph is not anywhere near being guaranteed.
Much more here from Scotusblog, which notes there's little precedent to wonder how this will play out. Will SCOTUS draw new maps itself? Tell the three-judge district panel to do that? Entertain a special session of the Lege, even? Who knows.
And, assuming Texas doesn't want the expense of two primary dates, it could have presidential repercussions, depending on who all is left and how close the race is. Would the state do a split primary system instead?