Litigation in the 2010 cycle

»  In the Supreme Court
»  Congressional challenge
»  State Senate challenge
»  State House challenge
»  Preclearance
»  Other suits

On November 8, a federal court in Washington, DC denied Texas' motion for summary judgment on preclearance, sending the preclearance question to trial; due to the delayed resolution of preclearance, a federal court in San Antonio drew interim maps for 2012.

On November 23, that San Antonio federal court released interim state Senate (map) and state House (map) plans; on November 26, it released a final interim congressional plan (map). On Jan. 20, 2012, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded for the San Antonio court to redraw and/or re-explain its work, deferring to Texas's enacted plan 1) except for those portions where there is a "likelihood of success" on a challenge under the Constitution or section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and 2) except for those portions where there is a "reasonable probability" that an aspect of the plan will cause it to be denied preclearance.

On Feb. 28, the San Antonio federal court issued new interim plans (congressional order and map, state Senate order and map, state House order and map). The court followed with explanatory opinions (Congress, state Senate, state House) on March 19. By court order, the primary has been set for May 29, 2012.  « NEW 

On July 19, 2011, Texas filed a helpful summary of redistricting litigation in Morris v. Texas, below. A federal court consolidated Perez v. Texas, MALC v. Texas, and Texas Latino Redistricting Task Force v. Perry on July 6, added Quesada v. Perry on July 21, and added Morris v. Texas and Rodriguez v. Perry on July 27. Teuber v. Texas was transferred to the same panel on July 8, and later dismissed.

 THANK YOU! »  Enormous thanks to Michael Li for maintaining his extraordinary Texas Redistricting site, tracking and analyzing the Texas litigation, and publicly posting most of the documents below. His summary of the San Antonio trial, among other posts, is essential reading.

As usual, Michael Li explains. My own take is here.

Perez v. Texas, No. 11A520 (S. Ct.) (state House), and No. 11A536 (S. Ct.) (Congress), and Davis v. Perry, No. 11A521 (S. Ct.) (state Senate): On Nov. 8, a federal court in Washington, DC denied Texas' motion for summary judgment on preclearance, sending the preclearance question to trial. Due to the delayed resolution of preclearance, a federal court in San Antonio drew interim maps for 2012. On Nov. 23, that San Antonio federal court released interim state Senate (map) and state House (map) plans; on November 26, it released a final interim congressional plan (map). The State argues that absent a finding of illegality, the federal court should have deferred more strongly to state wishes.
      Requests for stay
          - State request for Supreme Court to stay maps for
               - Congress (Nov. 30).
                    - Responses by TX Dem. Party et al. (Dec. 1), Rodriguez et al. (Dec. 5).
                    - Response by TX Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (Dec. 5).
                    - Reply, appendix (Dec. 3).
               - State Senate, appendix (Nov. 28).
                    - Responses by TX Dem. Party et al., Davis et al. (Dec. 1).
                    - Reply, appendix (Dec. 3).
               - State House, appendix (Nov. 28).
                    - Responses by TX Dem. Party et al., MALC et al. (Dec. 1).
                    - Response by TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Dec. 1).
                    - Reply, appendix (Dec. 3).
          - Grant of stay pending argument in January, 2012 (Dec. 9).
      Opening briefs
          - State, joint appendix (vols. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) (Dec. 21), supp. appendix (Jan. 3).
          - Joint appellees (Congress), Davis et al. (state Senate) (Dec. 21).
          - TX Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (supp. app.), TX NAACP et al. (Dec. 21).
               - Amicus briefs by DoJ, Cato Institute (Dec. 28).
               - Amicus briefs supporting plaintiffs, by Org. of Chinese Americans (Dec. 28).
               - Amicus briefs supporting the state, by Alabama et al. (covered states) (Dec. 28),
                 Rep. Canseco, Chen et al., Eagle Forum (Dec. 28).
      Reply briefs
          - State, Joint appellees (Congress), Davis et al. (state Senate) (Jan. 3).
          - TX NAACP et al. (Jan. 3).
     - Opinion vacating and remanding (Jan. 20).
The latest: On January 20, 2012, the Supreme Court vacated the opinion below, noting that the extent to which the San Antonio federal court deferred to unobjectionable portions of Texas's enacted plan was unclear. It remanded for the trial court to defer to Texas's enacted plan, except those portions where there is a "likelihood of success" on a challenge under the Constitution or section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and except those portions where there is a "reasonable probability" that an aspect of the plan will cause it to be denied preclearance. On remand, the trial court was instructed that it should also defer to minor population deviations in Texas's enacted plan where those districts are otherwise unproblematic, and should further defer to Texas's wishes in splitting precincts (which may now change), regardless of the exigencies of the impending election.

Perez v. Texas, No. 5:11-cv-00360 (W.D. Tex.), No. 11A520 (S. Ct.) (state House), and No. 11A536 (S. Ct.) (Congress): a challenge in federal court to the congressional and Texas state house districts, based on alleged violations of the Voting Rights Act, racial and partisan gerrymandering, and excessive population deviations based on impermissible purposes and on counting the population of individuals in prison at the facilities where they are incarcerated rather than at their former addresses. The issues were distilled in this joint pre-trial order, filed August 31.

Interim maps for 2012
      Round One
          - Statements on criteria for interim maps:
               - Cuellar, Canseco, LULAC, MALC, Perez et al., Quesada et al. (Oct. 17).
               - Rodriguez et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force, Tex. NAACP et al. (Oct. 17).
               - State (Oct. 17).
          - Analysis of the statements.
          - Proposed interim maps.
          - Court proposed interim congressional plan (Nov. 23).
               - Comments by Canseco, Cuellar, LULAC, MALC, Quesada et al.,
                 Rodriguez et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force, Tex. NAACP et al. (Nov. 25).
               - Comments by State (Nov. 25).
          - Final order setting interim congressional plan and map (Nov. 26).
          - Supplemental opinion explaining rationale for interim plans (Dec. 2).
      Request for stay
          - State motion for trial court to stay maps (Nov. 27), denial (Nov. 27).
          - State request for Supreme Court to stay maps (Nov. 30).
                    - Responses by TX Dem. Party et al. (Dec. 1), Rodriguez et al. (Dec. 5).
                    - Response by TX Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (Dec. 5).
                    - Reply, appendix (Dec. 3).
          - Grant of stay pending argument in January, 2012 (Dec. 9).
          - Court orders on election deadlines (1 and 2) due to stay (Dec. 14, 16).
     - On remand
          - DoJ advisory re section 5, UOCAVA (Jan. 27).
          - Briefs on interim relief:
               - DoJ, Omnibus joint plaintiffs, Barton, Canseco, MALC (Feb. 10).
               - Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force, State (Feb. 10).
          - Reply briefs:
               - Omnibus joint plaintiffs, Perez et al., State (Feb. 13).
          - Additional briefs (related to potential settlement maps)
               - MALC, Quesada et al. (Feb. 20).
               - Canseco, LULAC, MALC II, Rodriguez et al. (Feb. 22).
               - TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (I (Feb. 22), II (Feb. 23)), TX NAACP (Feb. 22).
               - State (Feb. 22).
          - Order setting interim congressional plan and map (Feb. 28).  « NEW 
          - Explanatory opinion (Mar. 19).
          - Order re election schedule (Mar. 1).

Challenge to original legislative maps
Discovery was completed and dispositive motions filed by August 17, 2011. A request to stay the proceedings pending preclearance was denied on August 11.
      Complaints
          - Original (May 9, 2011), 1st (May 31), 2d (June 7), 3d amd. complaint (July 19).
          - Texas Democratic Party crossclaim (July 19).
          - Intervenor Texas NAACP complaint (July 25), Johnson et al. complaint (July 25).
          - Intervenor Leg. Black Caucus original (July 25) and amd. complaint (July 27).
          - Intervenor Leg. Black Caucus voluntary dismissal (Aug. 2).
          - Intervenor Cuellar complaint (Aug. 22).
      Dispositive motions
          - Motion to dismiss (July 1) and response (July 11), denied as moot.
          - State's Motion to dismiss and motion for partial summary judgment (Aug. 17).
               - Responses by Cuellar, LULAC et al., MALC, Perez et al., Quesada et al. (Aug. 23)
                 Rodriguez et al., Tex. NAACP et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force et al.
               - State's reply re motion to dismiss and partial summary judgment (Aug. 24).
               - MALC sur-reply (Aug. 29).
          - Decision dismissing 15th Amd. claims, preserving others (Aug. 31). (analysis)
          - Decision dismissing partisan gerrymandering claims,
                 claims re counting incarcerated at prison (Sept. 2). (analysis)
      Discovery and other evidence
          - Perez expert reports (Martin, Jara, Aldrete, Murray, Lichtman, Smith) (Aug. 8).
          - Decision on privilege for congressional communications (Aug. 11).
          - Disclosed congressional correspondence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (Aug. 11).
          - State expert reports (Rives, Alford, Giberson, Gardner) (Aug. 22).
      Temporary relief (implementation of existing maps)
          - MALC et al. motion for TRO (Sept. 27), State response (Sept. 28).
          - Decision granting the TRO barring implementation before preclearance. (Sept. 29).
      Post-trial briefs
          - LULAC et al., MALC, Perez et al., Quesada et al., Rodriguez et al. (Oct. 9).
          - Tex. NAACP et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (Oct. 9).
          - State (Oct. 9).
      Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law
          - MALC, Perez et al. (I, II), Rodriguez/LULAC et al. (Feb. 10).
          - Tex. NAACP et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (Feb. 10).
          - State (Feb. 10).

The latest: On August 31, the court dismissed plaintiffs' 15th Amendment claims; on September 2, the court dismissed plaintiffs' partisan gerrymandering claims and claims relating to counting incarcerated persons in prison. The court held a trial on the remaining claims from September 6-16.
     After summary judgment was denied in the Texas v. Holder preclearance litigation, below, the court drew temporary remedial maps for 2012. On November 26, the federal court released a final interim congressional plan (map). On December 9, however, the Supreme Court stayed implementation of that plan, and on January 20, it vacated and remanded, requiring the trial court to redraw interim plans. On Feb. 28, the court issued new interim congressional plans (map). The primary has been set for May 29, 2012.  « NEW 

Davis v. Perry, No. 5:11-cv-00788 (W.D. Tex.) and No. 11A521 (S. Ct.): a challenge in federal court to the state Senate plan, based on equal protection and other constitutional concerns, and alleged violations of the Voting Rights Act.

Interim maps for 2012
     - Round One
          - Plaintiffs' brief re interim remedy (Oct. 7).
          - Court proposed interim state Senate plan (Nov. 17).
               - Comments on interim proposals by LULAC et al., State (Nov. 18).
          - Final order setting interim state Senate plan and map (Nov. 23).
     - Request for stay
          - State motion for trial court to stay maps (Nov. 23), denial (Nov. 25).
          - State request for Supreme Court to stay maps, appendix (Nov. 28).
               - Responses by TX Dem. Party et al., Davis et al. (Dec. 1).
               - Reply, appendix (Dec. 3).
          - Grant of stay pending argument in January, 2012 (Dec. 9).
               - Court orders on election deadlines (1 and 2) due to stay (Dec. 14, 16).
     - On remand
          - Briefs on interim relief by
            Omnibus joint plaintiffs, Davis/LULAC et al., Estes, State (Feb. 10).
          - Reply briefs by
            Omnibus joint plaintiffs, Davis/LULAC et al., Perez et al., State (Feb. 13).
          - Order setting interim state Senate plan and map (Feb. 28).  « NEW 
          - Explanatory opinion (Mar. 19).
          - Order re election schedule (Mar. 1).
          - Stipulation of dismissal of intervenor Estes (May 9).

Challenge to original legislative maps
     - Complaint (Sept. 22, 2011).
     - Texas Republican Party motion to dismiss (Oct. 3), opposition (Oct. 14), reply (Oct. 20).
     - State motion to dismiss (Oct. 21), opposition (Oct. 30), reply (Nov. 4).
     - State's motion for summary judgment (Nov. 5).
          - Opposition and statement of disputed facts (Nov. 9).
     - Scheduling order postponing trial to focus on interim districts (Nov. 10).
      Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law:
          - Davis/LULAC et al., Estes, Tex. NAACP et al., State (Feb. 10).

The latest: After summary judgment was denied in the Texas v. Holder preclearance litigation, below, the court drew temporary remedial maps for 2012. On November 23, the federal court released an interim state Senate (map). On December 9, however, the Supreme Court stayed implementation of that plan, and on January 20, it vacated and remanded, requiring the trial court to redraw interim plans. On Feb. 28, the court issued a new interim plan (map). The primary has been set for May 29.   « NEW 

Perez v. Texas, No. 5:11-cv-00360 (W.D. Tex.), No. 11A520 (S. Ct.) (state House), and No. 11A536 (S. Ct.) (Congress): a challenge in federal court to the congressional and Texas state house districts, based on alleged violations of the Voting Rights Act, racial and partisan gerrymandering, and excessive population deviations based on impermissible purposes and on counting the population of individuals in prison at the facilities where they are incarcerated rather than at their former addresses. The issues were distilled in this joint pre-trial order, filed August 31.

Interim maps for 2012
      Round One
          - Statements on criteria for interim maps:
               - Cuellar, Canseco, LULAC, MALC, Perez et al., Quesada et al. (Oct. 17).
               - Rodriguez et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force, Tex. NAACP et al. (Oct. 17).
               - State (Oct. 17).
          - Analysis of the statements.
          - Proposed interim maps.
          - Court proposed interim state House plan (Nov. 17).
               - Comments by Johnson et al., MALC, Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force.
               - Comments by Tex. NAACP, State (Nov. 18).
          - Final order setting interim state House plan and map (Nov. 23).
          - Supplemental opinion explaining rationale for interim plans (Dec. 2).
      Request for stay
          - State motion for trial court to stay maps (Nov. 23), denial (Nov. 25).
          - State request for Supreme Court to stay maps, appendix (Nov. 28).
                    - Responses by TX Dem. Party et al., MALC et al. (Dec. 1).
                    - Response by TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Dec. 1).
                    - Reply, appendix (Dec. 3).
          - Grant of stay pending argument in January, 2012 (Dec. 9).
          - Court orders on election deadlines (1 and 2) due to stay (Dec. 14, 16).
     - On remand
          - DoJ advisory re section 5, UOCAVA (Jan. 27).
          - Briefs on interim relief:
               - DoJ, Omnibus joint plaintiffs, MALC, Perez et al. (Feb. 10).
               - Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force, State (Feb. 10).
          - Reply briefs:
               - Omnibus joint plaintiffs, Perez et al., State (Feb. 13).
          - Additional briefs (related to potential settlement maps)
               - Perez et al. (Feb. 18), State/Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force (Feb. 21).
               - MALC, Perez et al. (II (Feb. 21), III (Feb. 22)).
          - Order setting interim state House plan and map (Feb. 28).  « NEW 
          - Explanatory opinion (Mar. 19).
          - Order re election schedule (Mar. 1).

Challenge to original legislative maps
Discovery was completed and dispositive motions filed by August 17, 2011. A request to stay the proceedings pending preclearance was denied on August 11.
      Complaints
          - Original (May 9, 2011), 1st (May 31), 2d (June 7), 3d amd. complaint (July 19).
          - Texas Democratic Party crossclaim (July 19).
          - Intervenor Texas NAACP complaint (July 25), Johnson et al. complaint (July 25).
          - Intervenor Leg. Black Caucus original (July 25) and amd. complaint (July 27).
          - Intervenor Leg. Black Caucus voluntary dismissal (Aug. 2).
          - Intervenor Cuellar complaint (Aug. 22).
      Dispositive motions
          - Motion to dismiss (July 1) and response (July 11), denied as moot.
          - State's Motion to dismiss and motion for partial summary judgment (Aug. 17).
               - Responses by Cuellar, LULAC et al., MALC, Perez et al., Quesada et al. (Aug. 23)
                 Rodriguez et al., Tex. NAACP et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force et al.
               - State's reply re motion to dismiss and partial summary judgment (Aug. 24).
               - MALC sur-reply (Aug. 29).
          - Decision dismissing 15th Amd. claims, preserving others (Aug. 31). (analysis)
          - Decision dismissing partisan gerrymandering claims,
                 claims re counting incarcerated at prison (Sept. 2). (analysis)
      Discovery and other evidence
          - Perez expert reports (Martin, Jara, Aldrete, Murray, Lichtman, Smith) (Aug. 8).
          - State expert reports (Rives, Alford, Giberson, Gardner) (Aug. 22).
      Temporary relief (implementation of existing maps)
          - MALC et al. motion for TRO (Sept. 27), State response (Sept. 28).
          - Decision granting the TRO barring implementation before preclearance. (Sept. 29).
      Post-trial briefs
          - LULAC et al., MALC, Perez et al., Quesada et al., Rodriguez et al. (Oct. 9).
          - Tex. NAACP et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (Oct. 9).
          - State (Oct. 9).
      Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law
          - MALC, Perez et al. (I, II), Rodriguez/LULAC et al. (Feb. 10).
          - Tex. NAACP et al., Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force et al. (Feb. 10).
          - State (Feb. 10).

The latest: On August 31, the court dismissed plaintiffs' 15th Amendment claims; on September 2, the court dismissed plaintiffs' partisan gerrymandering claims and claims relating to counting incarcerated persons in prison. The court held a trial on the remaining claims from September 6-16.
     After summary judgment was denied in the Texas v. Holder preclearance litigation, below, the court drew temporary remedial maps for 2012. On November 23, the federal court released an interim state House plan (map). On December 9, however, the Supreme Court stayed implementation of that plan, and on January 20, it vacated and remanded, requiring the trial court to redraw interim plans. On February 28, the court issued a new interim state House plan (map). The primary has been set for May 29.  « NEW 

Texas v. Holder, No. 1:11-cv-01303 (D.D.C.): an action in federal court requesting preclearance of Texas's state and federal districts, in parallel to the state's attempt to preclear maps through the DOJ's administrative process.
     - Complaint (July 19, 2011), DOJ answer (Sept. 19).
      Summary judgment
          - Motion for summary judgment (Sept. 14).
               - Exhibits 1-6, 7-13, 14-21, 22-30b, 31a-36
          - List of congressional and state House districts in dispute (Sept. 23).
               - List of elections considered by DoJ to assess retrogression (Oct. 3).
          - Davis/Veasey statement (re state Senate districts) (Sept. 23).
          - Consolidated statement of issues by DoJ and defendant-intervenors (Sept. 23).
          - Order denying summary judgment (Nov. 8), explanatory opinion (Dec. 22).
      Stay of proceedings
          - DOJ request for stay (Nov. 22), State's response (Dec. 1).
      Pretrial materials
          - Memos related to privilege, by DoJ, State, Davis et al. (Dec. 28),
            TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Dec. 28).
          - Prefiled direct testimony: (Jan. 17)
               - State (Geren, Solomons, Margo, Shapiro, Seliger, Alford (app. A, B, C, D)).
               - DOJ (Calvert, Hochberg, Herrero, Handley (I, II, III), Arrington (supp.).
               - Gonzales et al. (Escamilla (exh. A, B), Ansolabehere (exh. 2, 3)).
               - Davis et al. (DeLeon, Richie), MALC et al. (Kousser (add.)).
               - Tex. Latino Redistricting Task Force (Engstrom (I, II, III, IV), Flores (I, II)).
               - Tex. Leg. Black Caucus (Saenz), Tex. NAACP et al. (Green, Murray).
          - Opening trial briefs for Congress:
               - DoJ, Gonzales and Davis et al. (Jan. 13).
               - TX Latino Redistricting Task Force, Tex. NAACP et al. (Jan. 13).
          - Opening trial briefs for state Senate:
               - Davis et al., Tex. NAACP et al. (Jan. 13).
          - Opening trial briefs for state House:
               - DoJ, TX Latino Redistricting Task Force, Tex. Leg. Black Caucus et al. (Jan. 13).
               - Tex. NAACP et al. (Jan. 13).
          - Gonzales et al. brief re general election data (crossover/coalition districs) (Jan. 23).
      Trial transcripts and presentations
          - Transcripts
               - Jan. 17 (am, pm), Jan. 18 (am, pm), Jan. 19 (am, pm), Jan. 20 (am, pm).
               - Jan. 23 (am, pm), Jan. 24 (am, pm), Jan. 25 (am, pm), Jan. 26 (am).
               - Jan. 31 (am, pm).
          - Closing argument powerpoints:
               - State, DoJ, Davis et al., MALC, TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Jan. 31).
      Post-trial briefing
          - Proposed findings of fact:
               - Stipulated, State, DoJ, Davis et al., Gonzales et al., MALC (Feb. 3).
               - Tex. NAACP et al., TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (A, B, C) (Feb. 3).
          - Summary of expert testimony:
               - State, DoJ (Arrington, Handley), Davis et al., Gonzales et al., MALC (Feb. 6).
               - Tex. Black Legis. Caucus, Tex. NAACP et al. (Feb. 6).
               - TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Engstrom, Flores) (Feb. 6).
          - Post-trial briefs:
               - State, DoJ, Davis et al., Gonzales et al., MALC, Tex. Black Legis. Caucus (Feb. 6).
               - Tex. NAACP et al., TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Feb. 6).
          - Briefs re CD-25 by:
               - State, LULAC et al., Tex. NAACP et al., TX Latino Redistrict. Task Force (Mar. 13).
               - Response by LULAC et al. (Mar. 19).
               - Reply by TX Latino Redistricting Task Force (Apr. 2).
The latest: The DoJ's Sept. 19 answer to Texas's complaint indicates that the DoJ believes the state Senate plan entitled to preclearance, but that it believes that the state House and Congressional plan should not be precleared. Because Texas opted to seek a court judgment rather than administrative preclearance, no plan is yet considered precleared: that requires a court order. On November 8, the court denied Texas' motion for summary judgment, finding Texas' methodology improper and noting that further issues would have to be resolved at trial.

Teuber v. Texas, No. 4:11-cv-00059 (E.D. Tex.) and No. 5:11-cv-00572 (W.D. Tex.): a challenge in federal court to the population distribution of Texas state and federal districts, based on the inclusion of undocumented immigrants in population counts.
     - Original (Feb. 10, 2011), 1st (May 27), and 2nd amended complaint (June 22).
     - Intervenors' first (Feb. 22) and second (July 19) motion to dismiss.
     - Motion to dismiss (Mar. 24), denied as moot.
     - Motion to dismiss (May 10) and response (May 25), denied as moot.
     - Federal defendants' motion to dismiss (June 16), voluntary dismissal (June 29).
     - Motion to dismiss (July 6), denied as moot.
The latest: On July 26, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed all claims without prejudice.

Teuber v. Texas, No. CV-11-270 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Grayson County): a companion suit to the Teuber v. Texas case above, filed under state law in state court.
The latest: The complaint was filed on February 16, 2011, with an amended complaint filed on June 1, 2011.

Mexican-American Leg. Caucus v. Texas, No. C-902-11-C (Tex. Dist. Ct., Hidalgo County) and No. 7:11-cv-00144 (S.D. Tex.): a companion suit to the MALC v. Texas case above, filed under state law in state court, but removed to federal court.
     - Complaint (Apr. 5, 2011).
     - Motion to remand (June 2), response (June 22), reply (July 7).
The latest: The case was removed to federal court on May 13, 2011, and plaintiffs moved to remand on June 2, 2011.

Barton v. Texas, No. 11-20238-CN and No. 11-20263-CV (Tex. Dist. Ct., Navarro County): a challenge in state court to the anticipated unequal population of congressional districts, based on the anticipated failure of the legislature to draw congressional districts.
The latest: The complaint was filed on May 22, 2011, and an amended complaint was filed on May 30, 2011.

Washburn v. Texas, No. CV-110921 and No. CV-110931 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Grayson County): a challenge in state court to the anticipated unequal population of congressional districts, based on the anticipated failure of the legislature to draw congressional districts.
The latest: The complaint was filed on May 26, 2011, and an amended complaint was filed on May 30, 2011.

Limon v. Perry, No. D-1-GN-11-001611 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Travis County): a challenge in state court to the anticipated unequal population of congressional districts, based on the anticipated failure of the legislature to draw congressional districts.
The latest: The complaint was filed on May 30, 2011.

Garcia v. Perry, No. D-1-GN-11-001612 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Travis County): a challenge in state court to the anticipated unequal population of congressional districts, based on the anticipated failure of the legislature to draw congressional districts.
The latest: The complaint was filed on May 30, 2011.