Legal experts and community leaders who testified at the July 25 hearing told the Senate special committee that mid‑decade redistricting — driven by a July 7 Justice Department letter flagging four districts — risks illegal and racially discriminatory conduct and would undermine communities’ representation.

Ellen Katz, a law professor who said she was testifying in her personal capacity, told the committee the July 7 DOJ letter “asserts that the districts violate the Voting Rights Act. They don't,” and that the letter’s instructions would “amount to intentional race‑based discrimination.” Katz summarized the legal issue by telling the committee that if Texas were to follow the DOJ letter’s directive to redraw districts to alter their racial composition, “Were Texas to do it would be illegal.”

Texas NAACP President Gary Bledsoe said mid‑decade redistricting would continue a historical pattern of efforts to “silence and diminish the political powers of black Texans.” He and other witnesses said the districts named in the DOJ correspondence have operated as protected opportunity districts or functioning coalition districts and that dismantling them could violate constitutional protections identified in Supreme Court precedent.

Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia (CD‑29), one of the public witnesses called to speak at the outset, testified she represented one of the districts cited in the DOJ letter and told senators, “We should not be here today. We should be working on legislation to support families in the Hill Country after the devastating flooding… Instead, we're today playing political games.” Garcia urged the committee to reject partisan remapping.

Multiple other witnesses across the hearing reiterated similar concerns. Dozens of individuals from the Rio Grande Valley, Austin, the Hill Country and other regions said their communities need disaster relief and climate resiliency funding rather than mid‑decade map changes. Emily Amps of the Texas AFL‑CIO told the committee Texans “are facing serious challenges right now” and urged the senators to focus on flood recovery and other policy priorities.

Many of the expert witnesses explained the relevant case law. Katz and others said the Fifth Circuit’s recent Pettway decision addressed a narrow question about whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requires jurisdictions to draw coalition districts; it did not hold that coalition or majority‑minority districts are inherently unlawful. Katz told the committee the DOJ letter mischaracterized that precedent and the Constitution, and she argued the letter’s directive — to alter district racial composition to make coalition districts ineffective — would be contrary to Supreme Court guidance against intentionally dismantling effective minority opportunity districts.

Ending: The panel heard more than a hundred registered witnesses over the course of the virtual hearing; testimony ranged from legal analysis to local pleas that senators prioritize disaster response and community needs. No map was presented at the hearing and no formal redrawing occurred. The committee left open the option to consider maps later in the special session, and senators said they would continue to collect written comments and materials posted to the committee’s portal.