Callais Comes to California

In a filing that sends a clear message to Sacramento Democrats, the U.S. Department of Justice has invoked the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Louisiana v. Callais to hammer California’s racially gerrymandered congressional map, telling Governor Gavin Newsom and his allies that race-based district-drawing is unconstitutional—full stop.

On May 22, 2026, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jesus A. Osete and DOJ attorneys filed Plaintiff-Intervenor’s Opposition to Motions to Dismiss in the ongoing federal lawsuit David Tangipa, et al. v. Gavin Newsom, et al.

The document, shared on Tuesday by Osete with the pointed caption “Callais comes to California,” lays bare the evidence that Proposition 50’s rushed, legislature-drawn map was engineered with race as the “predominant factor” in at least sixteen congressional districts—all Hispanic-majority. 

Callais comes to California. pic.twitter.com/wuSNHMOafn

— Jesus A. Osete (@JesusOseteDOJ) May 27, 2026

The introduction pulls no punches, quoting directly from the Supreme Court’s April 29, 2026, ruling in Louisiana v. Callais.

“[T]he Constitution almost never permits … a State to discriminate on the basis of race.”  

California, the filing states, did exactly that: “when it drew new congressional district lines using race as the predominant factor in order to enhance Hispanic voting power.” 

The complaint alleges extensive direct and circumstantial evidence of intentional racial discrimination. 

Key Highlights from the DOJ Filing and Underlying Lawsuit  

• Mapmaker Paul Mitchell’s own words: The principal map drawer publicly boasted that “the number one thing that [he] first started thinking about” was “drawing a replacement Latino majority/minority district in the middle of Los Angeles.” Multiple California legislators made similar public statements evincing their desire to empower Hispanic and Black voters.  

• Deliberate manipulation of census blocks: California engaged in a “deliberate practice of passing Hispanic-majority census blocks from one adjacent district to another to preserve the number of Hispanic-majority congressional districts,” achieving the “racially motivated outcome” of preserving 16 majority Hispanic citizen voting-age population (CVAP) districts — but narrowing the majority to a tight 52-55% Hispanic range in those districts. That result, the DOJ says, “was ‘implausible without a deliberate racially motivated draw using explicit racial means.’”  

• The legal claims: The maps violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by using race as the predominant factor rather than traditional districting criteria.

The case stems from the November 2025 special election in which California voters, sold a bill of goods about “fairness” and “representation,” approved Proposition 50. That measure unconstitutionally handed the Democrat-controlled legislature the power to abolish the voter-approved independent Citizens Redistricting Commission’s maps and draw new congressional lines through 2030. 

As the California Globe has reported extensively, the move was a naked partisan power grab designed to offset Republican gains elsewhere and entrench Democrat majorities by prioritizing race over communities of interest, compactness, or any legitimate criteria. 

In November 2025, we covered the DOJ’s intervention in the original Tangipa lawsuit, quoting Osete’s warning: “Californians were sold an illegal, racially gerrymandered map, but the U.S. Constitution prohibits its use in 2026 and beyond.” We detailed how Proposition 50 was rushed through as a response to Texas’s own redistricting, with heavy backing from national Democrats including Barack Obama. 

In December 2025 and January 2026, we reported on Attorney General Rob Bonta’s transparent attempts to “run out the clock on justice,” and the DOJ’s emergency Supreme Court brief supporting the Republican plaintiffs’ bid to block the maps. Even after the high court denied an emergency stay earlier this year, the Globe warned that the underlying merits — and any precedent from Louisiana v. Callais — would ultimately decide the issue. 

We also exposed the map-drawing process itself: the involvement of political insiders, public statements by legislators and the mapmaker openly admitting racial targeting, and the broader pattern of Democrats in blue states (including Nevada) weaponizing redistricting to engineer majority-minority districts for partisan gain. 

Earlier this month, I reported:

In 2021, as Nevada conducted its post-census redistricting, Democratic-controlled Clark County openly engineered majority-Hispanic districts using explicit racial criteria, while the state Legislature—dominated by Democrats—drew maps with the help of an undisclosed consulting group whose identity has never been publicly revealed. The process systematically converted competitive and Republican-leaning areas into Democratic advantages, locking in structural gains designed to secure a veto-proof supermajority in a crucial swing state that remains closely divided overall.

In an on-the-record interview at a public Clark County meeting, redistricting consultant Dave Heller—a Democratic activist—described how county commissioners (all Democrats) directed him to create two majority-Hispanic (Latino) districts from one, aiming to amplify Latino representation on the seven-member board which had zero Hispanic members. Pointing to a map of Districts E and G, Heller explained carving a “heavily white” portion from District G and adding it to District E “because I’m trying to create this majority Latino district… because I’m trying to get as many Latino voices heard as possible.” Predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods were shifted from the existing majority-Hispanic District D into District E, pushing both to approximately 50.01% Hispanic population. 

The Globe has learned that Nevada may be next on the DOJ’s docket as federal officials move aggressively to enforce the Supreme Court’s Callais ruling against similar race-based redistricting schemes.

The three-judge court has set a hearing on the motions to dismiss for June 26, 2026, at 10:30 a.m. With the Supreme Court’s clear directive in Callais now on the books, the DOJ’s forceful intervention makes clear that the Trump administration will not tolerate states using race as a proxy for political advantage, no matter how loudly Newsom, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, or “non-partisan” activist groups like LULAC cry “partisanship.”

As the California Globe has documented from day one, this fight is about restoring constitutional redistricting principles that put voters, not race, first. Californians deserve maps drawn lawfully, not as tools for Sacramento’s power grab.

The Globe will continue to monitor every filing, every hearing, and every attempt by Newsom’s team to delay justice. Stay tuned.