Skip to main content

Sen. Warnock urges Democrats to investigate officials who redrew maps

U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., departs from the Senate chamber during a vote in the U.S. Capitol Building on July 13, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Senators faced questions from reporters after two weeks of recess and being in their home states. (Finn Gomez/Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — Senator Raphael Warnock, D-Ga, is calling for Democrats to investigate officials who he says have “manipulated their maps to silence the voices of Black voters,” as soon as they flip the House or Senate in the midterms.

In the plan, first reviewed by ABC News, Warnock said, “Here is what Democrats must do as soon as we regain power: investigate craven politicians, ban partisan gerrymandering, stop billionaires from buying our elections, expand our democracy and guarantee the right to vote for all Americans.”

Warnock has not ruled out a run for the White House in 2028. That possibility comes as roughly a third of the Congressional Black Caucus risks losing its seats before 2028, with GOP-led Southern legislatures redrawing maps after the Supreme Court’s Louisiana v. Callais ruling gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

In Louisiana, where Black residents make up roughly one-third of the population, a federal court had found that a post-2020 congressional map with only one majority-Black district likely diluted Black voting power. The legislature responded by drawing a second majority-Black district as courts had required in similar circumstances.

Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Supreme Court opinion, which said that states only violate the Voting Rights Act when “evidence supports a strong inference that the State intentionally drew its districts to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race.”

Republicans have argued that they are redrawing congressional maps to comply with the Supreme Court or to remedy unfairly-drawn districts, and that the districts that could be changed may still elect Black representatives to Congress.

Calling for officials who he says have engaged in gerrymandering to decimate minority voices is a position Warnock hasn’t called for until now, and he said in a phone interview with ABC News that the Callais decision was an “inflection point” for him to do so.

“A Democratic majority in either chamber must immediately investigate these officials, including through Congressional hearings, document requests, depositions, testimony, and, if necessary, subpoenas,” Warnock’s plan states. “We must analyze their statements, actions, and contributions to determine if there is any evidence that they broke any laws in their race to gerrymander and silence Black voices.”

Asked whether Democrats who’ve engaged in partisan gerrymandering — in California, for example — should face investigation, Warnock said that the state’s redistricting came in direct response to President Donald Trump pushing Texas to gerrymander five seats.

“There’s a significant difference between that and an open process in which Californians got to vote,” Warnock said. “This was not done in a smoky, dark room. They had a referendum. Again, if I had my druthers, there would be no gerrymandering.”

“There are only 22 districts out of 435 in this country in which a Democrat or a Republican could win the seat. I’m a Democrat. I think that’s a sad state of affairs,” Warnock added.

Warnock said that he’s been pushing his party to prioritize voting rights since he was first elected. In 2021, during negotiations over the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Warnock urged then-President Joe Biden in a phone call that legislative action on voting rights should be prioritized alongside the package.

Warnock said he tried to convince former Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to amend the filibuster so the party could pass voting rights legislation four years ago, arguing voting rights mattered more than a procedural rule.

“I said to my caucus then, as the newcomer, that I was afraid that if we don’t do something … we would cross a Rubicon in this country that we wouldn’t be able to get back,” Warnock said. “I said that then, and sadly, it didn’t get done.”

Looking ahead, Warnock said if Democrats flip even just one chamber, the party should break up pieces of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, and “force everybody to vote on it.”

 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

South Carolina to hold first 2028 Democratic presidential primary

▶ Watch Video: Democrats expected to approve South Carolina as first primary in 2028, but other states pushing back Democrats on Saturday approved a new presidential nominating calendar for 2028, cementing South Carolina's place as the first official Democratic primary state, as the party looks to elevate states that better reflect its diverse coalition of voters.The vote came during the Democratic National Committee's summer meeting in Austin, where members signed off on a schedule that begins with South Carolina on Jan. 22, followed by Nevada on Feb. 1. New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan and Virginia round out the early-state lineup throughout February, all voting before Super Tuesday.The new calendar goes into effect amid a tug-of-war within the progressive and establishment wings of the party. It also continues a shift away from a tradition that for half a century gave states that are predominantly composed of White voters — Iowa and New Hampshire — outsized influence at the start of the nominating process. Strategists say the new calendar gives greater influence to Black and Latino voters, who make up key parts of the Democratic coalition. "If you're not strong with Latino voters or if you're not strong with Black voters, you know you can only get so far in this calendar," CBS News contributor and Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha said, adding that the schedule shows Black voters "the respect that they're due."Not everyone in the party is on board. Democratic leaders in Iowa and New Hampshire — previously the first and second states to hold primary contests, respectively — excoriated the new map as soon as the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee recommended it, arguing that it diminishes the role of states that have long taken on the responsibility of shaping the presidential nomination battlefield. "New Hampshire's First in the Nation primary is a tested proving ground in a closely contested swing state that forges better candidates and better presidents — and despite what DNC insiders say, that hasn't changed," New Hampshire's U.S. congressional delegation said in a statement. "As a state with highly engaged voters, we put candidates through their paces and thoroughly vet them. And our small size means that actually meeting and talking to voters takes precedence over super PACs or mega-donor-fueled campaigns."Momentum for South Carolina's ascension in the calendar traces back to 2020, when a victory there shifted momentum in the presidential primary that year to Joe Biden after he performed poorly in Iowa, New Hampshire and, to a lesser extent, Nevada. Under pressure from Biden and his allies, the DNC moved South Carolina's primary to first for the 2024 calendar. That cycle, New Hampshire defied the DNC's revised schedule and held its primary before South Carolina, citing a state law that mandates it hold the first primary. In response, the party stripped the contest of its sanctioned status. DNC Chair Ken Martin has signaled that if New Hampshire jumps ahead again in 2028, punishment will be more severe. "This is a calendar this party is actually going to protect," Martin told reporters after the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee met last month to propose a new schedule. The new calendar could impact the ideological battle within the Democratic Party between establishment moderates and more progressive candidates, including far-left democratic socialists. With no obvious 2028 front-runner, the newly approved schedule gives South Carolina, Nevada and the other four early states disproportionate influence over which faction can build early momentum in the 2028 presidential primaries. Among the states granted early slots, only Nevada and New Mexico offer clear advantages to progressives. Michigan has shown openness this cycle to progressives, with the primary victory of Abdul El-Sayed in the Senate race, but historically has elected more moderate candidates. New Hampshire voters have over time shown an openness to outsiders, but they typically have a more independent streak rather than a steep ideological lean. Progressives face an uphill battle in South Carolina, which has fewer of the White voters with college degrees who tend to support further-left candidates, and Virginia, which has long favored more moderate candidates. The decision to elevate states with large Black and Hispanic populations also comes as Democrats fight to stop the GOP from gaining ground with those two groups in general elections. President Trump won 48% of the Hispanic vote in 2024, up 12 points from four years earlier, and he won 15% of Black voters, almost double his share in 2020, according to the Pew Research Center. His share of non-Hispanic White voters remained stable, at 55%.
Read Next Story