In recent weeks, and as the Nov. 4 election day approaches, California residents have been bombarded with advertisements and voters have received ballots in the mail with only one thing to vote for or against: Proposition 50. The state’s official and nonpartisan voter guide says that the measure is a legislative constitutional amendment that “authorizes temporary changes to congressional district maps in response to Texas’ partisan redistricting.”

But what does that mean? And why all the hoopla for this special election? In the conversation below, UCLA School of Law professor Rick Hasen — a leading authority in election law and the founding director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at the law school — dives into the nitty-gritty to explain what Proposition 50 does and what’s at stake.

What is the political and electoral context behind Proposition 50?

California voters approved two ballot propositions, in 2008 and 2010, that moved the job of drawing district lines for the state legislature and for California’s congressional districts from the state legislature to an independent commission made up of Democrats, Republicans and independents. The commission process was designed to take a lot of the politics out of drawing district lines.

Proposition 50, if it passes, would override the commission’s lines used for congressional districts in the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. It would not affect the lines used to elect members of the state legislature, and the job of redistricting congressional districts would go back to the commission after the 2030 census.

So, if previous ballot propositions already dealt with this issue, why is readdressing it now important for California voters?

Democrats in the state legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom pushed for Proposition 50 to redraw California’s congressional districts now in a way that is likely to yield up to five more seats for Democrats in 2026. Democrats in California pushed the plan after President Trump encouraged Texas, and then other states, to engage in a new round of partisan gerrymandering to help Republicans. The map passed by Texas may yield Republicans up to five more congressional seats in 2026, so Proposition 50 is a counter to that.

If Proposition 50 passes, could it be subject to any sort of legal challenge?

Republicans in California already filed a legal challenge with the California Supreme Court arguing that Proposition 50 could not properly go on the ballot. That challenge failed. Because Proposition 50, if passed, would amend the state constitution, it is unlikely that any challenge based on state law would succeed. It is possible that the new lines created by the legislature in the event Proposition 50 passes could be challenged in federal court, arguing that they violate the Voting Rights Act or the U.S. Constitution. We have already seen such challenges in Texas against Texas’s new maps. That litigation is pending. 

How common is the type of shift that Proposition 50 would create, and what can we learn from other states or past episodes?

Proposition 50 is very unusual, and it results from a feature of the state constitution that says that a ballot measure passed by the voters can only be amended by another vote of the people (unless the measure itself provides otherwise). In Texas, the state legislature already controls redistricting, and so when it drew new district lines, it was just amending its own law. Here in California, the state legislature did not have the power to directly change the district lines that were created by the independent commission. Instead, the legislature only had the power to put this up for a vote of the people. So, ultimately, the voters will have to decide.

Would you summarize the thinking behind their options?

It comes down to two kinds of arguments. Supporters say that the fairness of congressional districting should be judged on a national basis, and if Republicans are engaging in partisan gerrymandering in states they control, Democrats need to fight back. Opponents of Proposition 50 argue that two wrongs don’t make a right and that there is not a strong enough reason to set aside the maps drawn by a commission that voters charged with taking politics out of the process.

How might the outcome of Proposition 50 influence public attitudes toward redistricting, independent commissions and the balance between legislative power and voter fairness?

This is a really interesting question. There’s no reason to believe that partisan gerrymandering will stop in 2030. Will Democrats try to go to California voters again, to get them to suspend or reverse the use of the commission to draw congressional districts after the 2030 census and the new round of redistricting? If Proposition 50 is successful, will other states decide that they too should abandon their redistricting commissions in favor of a more political process? Will Congress, which has the power to impose standards for fair congressional districts around the country under its powers in Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution, try to impose a more national solution? It is too early to say, but I am confident that Proposition 50 will not be the last word on these questions and may provoke or inspire additional responses around the country.

This fall, Hasen is moderating a series of conversations on redistricting, voting rights, the impact of social media and other key issues that will impact the 2026 election.

Register for upcoming events and view videos of recent presentations on the Safeguarding Democracy Project website.