Indiana GOP Rebels: Senate Blocks Trump-Backed Redistricting Power Grab

Paul Riverbank, 12/13/2025Indiana’s Senate rejected a Republican-drawn congressional map in a rare bipartisan move, spotlighting splits over gerrymandering, party loyalty, and democratic fairness—with local drama and national stakes underscoring the profound impact of redistricting on America’s political landscape.

It wasn’t just an ordinary squabble in a reliably red state; this one was tinged with a brand of tension you feel in your gut. The proposed lines would have carved up urban corners, especially Indianapolis and its northwest rim, splitting progressive strongholds and nudging every district toward the right. The plan had breezed through Indiana’s House, but on the Senate floor, something cracked. Perhaps it was principle, or perhaps just a sense of overreach—but for almost half the Republican senators, the gerrymander felt a step too far.

Take Sen. Spencer Deery. He stood before his colleagues and, in a voice steadier than some expected, framed his opposition through the lens of conservatism itself—no hedging, no apologizing. “I, like many of those who will join me in voting no today, are constitutional fiscal and religious conservatives,” he said, making it clear he believed in fairness as a conservative value. For Deery, the fight was about the spirit of the system, not just about numbers on a map.

Not everyone saw it that way. Sen. Mike Gaskill, heading the Elections Committee—a Republican through and through—urged his peers to dig in. “Please, stand up and fight for your people the way they fight for theirs,” he said. For Gaskill and others, this was politics as a contest of wills, and giving ground looked a lot like defeat.

Pressure from outside Indiana was no less fierce. Former President Trump threw down the gauntlet online, warning that any Republican who fell out of line would draw a primary challenge from his MAGA faithful. Allies like Turning Point Action echoed that threat. Party loyalty, to some, came before misgivings about the process.

For a few lawmakers, the blowback got ugly. One, Sen. Michael Bohacek, who’s spoken openly about his daughter’s struggles with Down syndrome, revealed he’d received bomb threats because of his vote—a grim testament to the toxic edge national pressure campaigns can inflict. State police confirmed that other legislators were targeted as well, though they kept details close given ongoing investigations.

The debate wasn’t just about lines on a map, or even about Indiana. With the House majority in Washington so narrow, every district gained or lost makes a difference. The issue is playing out around the country: states like Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio have all greenlit GOP-friendly maps, while California, ever the outlier, gave the process to a state commission with its own unique challenges.

On the Senate floor, the subplots ran deep. Democrat Fady Qaddoura spoke up for competition and openness, saying, “Any political party on Earth that cannot run and win based on the merits of its ideas is unworthy of governing.” His point was met with a mix of nods and eye rolls. On the flip side, Republican Michael Young zeroed in on the stakes in Washington—control is tight, the next race is already looming, and Indiana’s battle is part of a much larger chess game.

For now, Indiana’s redistricting is up in the air. What comes next is far from certain, but the night’s debate—full of disagreements, uneasy alliances, and hard choices—showed there are still lines, drawn or not, that some politicians aren’t willing to cross. For everyone watching, it was a reminder that the fight over the map is never just about geography—it’s about the soul of the political process itself.

If you happened to wander into Indiana’s State Senate on that evening, you’d have heard the kind of sound that doesn’t usually follow a legislative vote—full-throated cheers, a smattering of applause from the gallery, even subdued thanks echoing from onlookers. Lawmakers, some surprised and others resolute, had just delivered a result that few political oddsmakers had predicted: the state’s new congressional map, designed to all but guarantee Republican control for another decade, had just been shot down. Nineteen voted aye, but a solid block of thirty-one said no. A majority of those in the “no” camp? Republicans themselves.It wasn’t just an ordinary squabble in a reliably red state; this one was tinged with a brand of tension you feel in your gut. The proposed lines would have carved up urban corners, especially Indianapolis and its northwest rim, splitting progressive strongholds and nudging every district toward the right. The plan had breezed through Indiana’s House, but on the Senate floor, something cracked. Perhaps it was principle, or perhaps just a sense of overreach—but for almost half the Republican senators, the gerrymander felt a step too far.Take Sen. Spencer Deery. He stood before his colleagues and, in a voice steadier than some expected, framed his opposition through the lens of conservatism itself—no hedging, no apologizing. “I, like many of those who will join me in voting no today, are constitutional fiscal and religious conservatives,” he said, making it clear he believed in fairness as a conservative value. For Deery, the fight was about the spirit of the system, not just about numbers on a map.Not everyone saw it that way. Sen. Mike Gaskill, heading the Elections Committee—a Republican through and through—urged his peers to dig in. “Please, stand up and fight for your people the way they fight for theirs,” he said. For Gaskill and others, this was politics as a contest of wills, and giving ground looked a lot like defeat.Pressure from outside Indiana was no less fierce. Former President Trump threw down the gauntlet online, warning that any Republican who fell out of line would draw a primary challenge from his MAGA faithful. Allies like Turning Point Action echoed that threat. Party loyalty, to some, came before misgivings about the process.For a few lawmakers, the blowback got ugly. One, Sen. Michael Bohacek, who’s spoken openly about his daughter’s struggles with Down syndrome, revealed he’d received bomb threats because of his vote—a grim testament to the toxic edge national pressure campaigns can inflict. State police confirmed that other legislators were targeted as well, though they kept details close given ongoing investigations.The debate wasn’t just about lines on a map, or even about Indiana. With the House majority in Washington so narrow, every district gained or lost makes a difference. The issue is playing out around the country: states like Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio have all greenlit GOP-friendly maps, while California, ever the outlier, gave the process to a state commission with its own unique challenges.On the Senate floor, the subplots ran deep. Democrat Fady Qaddoura spoke up for competition and openness, saying, “Any political party on Earth that cannot run and win based on the merits of its ideas is unworthy of governing.” His point was met with a mix of nods and eye rolls. On the flip side, Republican Michael Young zeroed in on the stakes in Washington—control is tight, the next race is already looming, and Indiana’s battle is part of a much larger chess game.For now, Indiana’s redistricting is up in the air. What comes next is far from certain, but the night’s debate—full of disagreements, uneasy alliances, and hard choices—showed there are still lines, drawn or not, that some politicians aren’t willing to cross. For everyone watching, it was a reminder that the fight over the map is never just about geography—it’s about the soul of the political process itself.