Redistricting Adds Democratic Palm Springs to Issa’s District Proposition 50’s passage last month reshaped California’s congressional map, inserting the Democratic‑leaning city of Palm Springs into Rep. Darrell Issa’s San Diego‑area district, dramatically raising the district’s Democratic tilt[2]. The Supreme Court is simultaneously reviewing a challenge to new Texas congressional maps, creating uncertainty for any potential Texas move[2]. Issa’s interest initially focused on Texas’s 32nd District northeast of Dallas, a seat also under scrutiny by local GOP leaders[2].

Issa Explores Texas Relocation Options Sources reported that Issa weighed a relocation to preserve his seat, noting the filing deadline for Texas candidacies fell on the Monday following the report[2]. Texas Republican officials expressed skepticism about a non‑resident candidate’s electability, while House GOP campaign head Rep. Richard Hudson publicly urged Issa to stay in California[2]. The article outlined three possible outcomes: remain in California, shift to another California district, or withdraw from the race entirely[2].

Issa Decides to Remain in San Diego Seat On December 6, Issa announced he will keep his San Diego seat, citing “pretty deep” roots in California and the strategic advantage of incumbency[1]. In a phone interview, he encouraged fellow California Republicans facing newly competitive districts to run for reelection rather than retire or seek other states[1]. The piece also noted the upcoming contest between Ken Calvert and Young Kim in a merged Riverside‑Orange County district, highlighting intra‑party battles sparked by the redistricting[1].

National Redistricting Conflict Influences Republican Strategies President Trump urged Texas Republicans to redraw lines to capture five additional seats, while California Democrats released maps aimed at gaining five seats of their own[1]. Federal courts have already intervened in both states’ maps, and Issa labeled mid‑census redistricting “inherently unconstitutional,” underscoring the legal and political turbulence surrounding the process[1].