Amidst all of the redistricting debacles that plagued this election cycle, and among all of the talk of potential Republican gerrymandering backfires, there was one attempted map this cycle that was so stupid and short-sighted (all in a vain attempt to MAYBE hold all four seats while complying with the court's order) that Utah Republicans should honestly be glad the court enforced a safely 1D-3R map instead.

This map would've created two competitive districts (one of which came within a point of flipping in 2020). Utah even shifting only about 7 points bluer from 2024 (approximately R+14) would be enough for it to dummymander. This is extremely apparent in the 2022 senate race, where not only does McMullin win two districts (one of them by double digits!), but he even brought the 1st district below Safe margins

A probable common retort to this argument, and indeed what Utah Republicans were likely banking on is that Utah Republicans are far stronger on the congressional level than what presidential results would suggest, and indeed, Republicans would've won both competitive districts by 12-13 points in 2024.

However, had Option C been allowed to go into effect like planned, not only would a 12-13 point seat still be vulnerable in this environment, but Democrats would've likely pivoted hard and provided large amounts of funding toward these races as crucial pickups, and these seats no longer being completely noncompetitive would likely drive Democratic margins enough for both seats to flip, especially if the environment is closer to D+10 like later polling has suggested.

Even the riskiest Republican gerrymanders like Florida, North Carolina and the proposed map in South Carolina only really fail in environments approaching the largest historical Democratic waves (around D+12-14). Utah Option C realistically could potentially have dummymandered as low as D+6.

The courts saved Utah Republicans from themselves.

I originally wanted to do these with my other slate of minor state-level election predictions but I couldn't figure out how to really make it readable until now due to the fact states usually elect more than 1 at a time.

No state supreme court is going to change ideologically as a result of the 2026 elections, however their results are likely to very consequential for 2028 and beyond.

State Supreme Courts

Given the typical huge margins justices win these by, all state courts with retention elections are Safe for the incumbent party (AK, AZ, CA, CO, FL, KS, MD, MO, NM, OK, SD, TN, UT, WY) and are mostly ignored in this analysis, as well as the states where the opposing party did not bother running a candidate for any of their races (KY, LA, ID, NV, ND, OR)

Alabama | Safe R (1) / Uncontested R (1)

One justice is running unopposed and the other one who isn't is not facing any real serious candidate and will likely win at least 70% of the vote.

Georgia | Lean R (2) / Uncontested R (1)

In theory, Georgia's supreme court should present some solid pickup opportunities for Democrats given the state's leftward trend, and it IS probably one of their only feasible pickup opportunities this year (other than Wisconsin which already happened and Ohio which I'll get to), however considering Democrats did not even bother contesting one of the seats, and Republicans have historically done much better in lower-key statewide races like this, Democrats face a somewhat uphill climb here, even with the environment.

Kansas | Safe D (2)

While the supreme court elections themselves are likely to be completely uncompetitive this year due to being retention elections, Kansas voters are highly likely to pass the Kansas Elections for Supreme Court Justices Amendment that converts these elections into partisan ones starting in 2028, likely decimating the 5-1 (one vacancy) Democratic majority in the court.

Michigan | Very Likely D (2)

The two incumbent Democrats are not really facing any serious opponents and should have no trouble holding these seats.

Minnesota | Safe D (3)

The Minnesota GOP is in such shambles that they pretty much do not bother even contesting these races, so if these incumbent Democrats DO face any opponents they'll likely win by 20 points or more regardless.

Montana | Lean R (1) ^((flip)****)

With the incumbent Democrat in this race retiring, this is the single best state supreme court seat pickup opportunity for Republicans. While the race is officially non-partisan, it is likely that Montana's conservative lean is enough for the Republican candidate to win here. However, as Montana's supreme court is currently 5D-2R, this would not flip partisan control to Republicans, but it would put them in a good position to do so in 2028.

North Carolina | Likely D (1)

An incumbent Democrat is up for re-election, but given the highly blue environment, incumbent advantage, and Roy Cooper on the ballot, she should have no trouble holding her seat. Holding this seat is absolutely vital for Democrats to have a chance of flipping the court back in the future, however.

Ohio | Lean D (1) / Lean R (1)

Two sitting justices (Brunner (D) and Hawkins (R)) are up for re-election in the state this year. Given the current environment, both of these races should be quite competitive.

Brunner faces a much more difficult path to re-election than she did in 2020, as Ohio has since adopted partisan elections for their state high court. However, given she won by 10 points with presidential turnout and the >D+6 environment, she should be favored to win re-election, though being pretty vulnerable.

Hawkins' seat presents a prime sleeper pickup opportunity for Democrats, given he under-performed Trump on the ballot, winning by a little under 10 in 2024 (after Ohio had already adopted partisan elections for the state supreme court). However he's more favored than not (at least until the environment reaches something like D+7-8).

Unfortunately for Democrats, even holding Brunner's seat and flipping Hawkins' seat would still result in a 5R-2D court, and it's incredibly unlikely they flip any of the three seats up for election in 2028 due to presidential turnout.

Texas | Very Likely R (7)

Democrats do not seriously contest Supreme Court elections in the state of Texas, with most of these seats being won by Safe (>15) margins or straight up being uncontested in 2024. Even with a highly favorable midterm environment, the most Dems could really hope for here is a Republican margin in the high single digits.

Washington | Safe D (5)

Safely Democratic.

Better redistricting analysis map but the colors are by party this time so it's more readable

To see how these predictions have changed overtime, view the sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BByiUBI6oQJAJ04jDomwo-Pvxhrpdy7cAjJ-_iyQrGo/edit?gid=213140168#gid=213140168

A little early this time around but I wanted to account for the Florida redistricting quickly

Generic Ballot: D+5.8 (+0.3)

House

Net gain since previous prediction:

-3 Democrats | +1 Tossup | +2 Republicans

Florida's redistricting is the major thing of note, shifting 5 seats significantly towards Republicans and somewhat shifting 5 seats towards Democrats (FL-3 and FL-21 shifted due to change in generic ballot, and FL-11 shifted due to a retirement)

The filing deadline in a few states passed, leading to Dems getting three more uncontested races in New York.

Texas 23rd was on the Lean/Likely fence ever since Herrera became the presumptive candidate, but with the (glacial) national shift in Democrats' direction, Herrera's controversies becoming more well known within the district, and the district's vulnerability to a Hispanic shift back to Democrats, I finally felt the rating change was apt.

The other seats shifted as a result of the generic ballot.

Senate

Net gain since previous prediction:

0 Democrats | 0 Tossups | 0 Republicans

Alaska | Maintains Tossup, but Tilts D

Peltola is scoring impressive numbers in recent polling, but considering Alaska was just shifted to Tossup in the previous prediction, and the fact that Alaska polling is somewhat unreliable and.. weird, I felt it is too early to call it a Lean D race.

Iowa | Likely R --> Lean R

Polling coming out of Iowa this past month has been extremely promising for Democrats. Still pretty Republican favored, but it's at least likely below R+5 now.

Minnesota | Maintains Likely D, but barely

There has been almost no polling coming out of this state in recent months (polling average has remained at D+5 since Tafoya announced her election bid), but by national environment alone, this race will likely be quite close to that Very Likely margin.

Mississippi | Maintains Very Likely R, but barely

The few polls that have come out of Mississippi have been somewhat more favorable for Democrats than expected, though I'm still not ready to say it goes below R+10 quite yet.

Ohio | Maintains Lean R

Contrary to Iowa, Republicans in both the Ohio Senate and Governor races have expanded their polling lead, and this bodes especially badly for Brown who faces both a stronger opponent and a more polarized race.

Texas | Maintains Lean R, but barely

Talarico has taken the polling lead in the Texas Senate race (due to a single poll). However, like with the Ohio senate race when Brown temporarily held a polling lead, I am not ready to move this past Lean R yet, with the expectation that it could at any moment shift back to a Paxton lead. If Talarico can somehow maintain this lead though, then Tossup may be appropriate.

Gubernatorial

Alaska | Lean R --> Tossup

The first polls for this race have finally come out and they are nearly as great for Democrats as Peltola's. Given Alaska's governor is currently the most unpopular in the nation, Alaska's more elastic nature compared to other states, and the extremely strong early polling, I have shifted this race towards Democrats.

California | Very Likely D --> Safe D

With Trump nominating Bianco and Swalwell being outed as a sex pest, the Republican pipe-dream of a two-R lockout has truly gone up in smoke. In fact, recent polls have Democrats closing in on a potential two-D lockout between Becerra and Steyer.

Iowa | Tossup --> Lean D

We finally have polling for this race and holy hell, the Sandstorm momentum is clearly real here. Granted, a point against the current D+7-10 lead (depending on poll aggregator) is that every poll so far is a D internal. However, with an early lead this massive, it's still clear that momentum is on Sand's side here.

Nebraska | Maintains Very Likely R, but barely

Similar to Mississippi's Senate race, early polling in the Nebraska governor's race is very promising for Democrats, indicating a single-digit lead for unpopular governor Pillen. However, like with Mississippi, It is too early for me to think that this low-profile gubernatorial race will go below double-digits quite yet.

Ohio | Maintains Tossup, but barely

Recent polling has been quite favorable to Vivek, however he is still a terrible, scandal-ridden candidate, so I maintain this race to be an easier lift for Democrats than the concurrent Senate race, even still.

Rhode Island | Very Likely D --> Safe D

This race was marked Very Likely D for the longest time on the slim chance that Dan McKee somehow pulls an upset and wins the primary but considering he is now in a distant third and still dwindling that possibility has all but evaporated.

South Dakota | Maintains Safe R, but could prove interesting?

South Dakota is typically a state that is completely uninteresting in modern elections given its sheer Republican lean, but on the state level, governor's races here have proven oddly competitive at times (like in 2018). There is no polling data for this state as of yet, but the race going slightly below Safe margins is definitely possible. Oklahoma is typically another such state, however Republicans have an extremely strong over-performer candidate this time around, so I don't forsee it getting oddly close like it did in 2018 and 2022.

Florida has finally (somewhat) unveiled its long rumored congressional redraw. With the state high court being 6 of 7 DeSantis appointees and the likely death of the Voting Rights Act, this map will be very unlikely to face any obstacles in being enacted.

Much like Texas, however, all of the "new four republican" seats are not necessarily guaranteed, especially this year.

Things have certainly become much more difficult for Florida Democrats (as if they weren't already), but with the targeted Florida U.S. house Democrats being over-performers (Darren Soto of FL-9 outperformed Harris by 8), and the favorable environment, there is an unlikely, but definitely reasonable chance of Democrats holding every targeted seat. The 9th (Trump+15) and 22nd (Trump+13) will be the most difficult Dem holds, only just barely being Lean R due to the incumbent Dems' history of over-performance.

This map greatly shores up vulnerable 15th district Republican Laurel Lee (PVI R+5 to R+12), as well as somewhat vulnerable 23rd district Democrat Jared Moskowitz (PVI D+2 to D+8) (which I did not expect), however several potentially vulnerable seats like the 4th, 7th and 13th are not at all or only barely changed in composition, and the 12th and 18th could become newly competitive in a blue enough environment.

Net seats: D+2 to R+4

(Based on a best-guess clone of the fox news map on DRA)

FL-3 and FL-21's changes are related to generic ballot (will be noted in the upcoming May mid-term predictions releasing April 31st), not redistricting as those seats were not significantly re-configured