Tennessee's "Overbearing Majority"
By Sean Evans, Chair and Professor of Political Science
May 11, 2026 -
In Federalist #10, James Madison warned that “the public good is…too often decided, not according to the rules of justice, and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” This week, Tennessee’s “overbearing” Republican legislative majority redrew Congressional district lines to give Republicans a 9-0 advantage in the U.S. House.
This partisan gerrymandering is wrong because it weakens representation, insulates officials from public opinion, and undermines democracy in these polarized times.
Gerrymandering draws legislative districts to give an advantage to a group. It involves cracking and packing. Cracking disperses a group of voters across multiple districts, so they cannot win a district. Packing crams certain groups of voters into as few districts as possible. The “packed group” may win by a landslide, but the surrounding districts are more favorable to the other party.
Gerrymandering undermines representation by allowing politicians to select their voters rather than the other way around. We reapportion legislative districts every ten years after the census to account for population and political shifts. When done fairly, representative government reflects the state’s diverse interests, and policy will more closely reflect the voters’ interests.
Tennessee’s gerrymandered districts are overrepresenting Republican, conservative, White, and rural interests. After this redistricting, Republicans will likely hold all nine seats, even though Democrats win 35% of the state vote. According to the Cooperative Election Study, 22% of Tennesseans are very conservative. However, six of nine representatives are ideological extremists, voting more conservatively than 88% of the entire House. 27% of Tennesseans are non-white, but all Congressmembers will be White.
Two-thirds of Tennesseans live in urban and suburban areas. Yet, Tennessee split the two largest urban districts into three districts each and split the Nashville suburbs into five districts. This gerrymander favors Republican suburbs and rural areas to the detriment of urban voters.
Gerrymandering also insulates officials from public disapproval. The Founders gave members of the House two-year terms so they would be responsive to the passions of the majority. When a president sits at 40% approval, his party should be thumped in the midterm elections. That is why President Trump started the redistricting wars because he wanted to avoid the consequences of dealing with a Democratic House.
Elections are important signals to politicians about what kinds of politicians and policies are popular. Yet, partisan gerrymandering means 81% of seats nationwide are safe for one party in 2026, and only 9% are real toss-ups. When so many Congressmen are not afraid of defeat, they can ignore state and national opposition, which creates an unrepresentative House.
Third, partisan gerrymandering in our polarized times undermines democracy. The two most important democratic norms are restraint in exercising one’s power (institutional forbearance) and recognizing one’s opponents as legitimate (mutual tolerance). Trump has shown no restraint through excessive use of executive actions, prosecuting political opponents, dissolving federal agencies without Congressional consent, attacking judicial independence, and more.
Historically, federalism has been a check on the federal government’s power. Today, the nationalization of politics makes federalism an accelerant of national trends. Thus, Tennessee’s state legislature is showing no restraint by redrawing lines for strictly partisan purposes because they believe Democrats are too radical and a threat to the nation.
This justification is part of the partisan doom loop, where ideological overreach by one party justifies ideological overreach by the other. Each overreach radicalizes the other side more, makes them more threatened by their opponents, and pushes them further to the extreme. This constant overreach will lead one party to take extreme actions that will destroy our constitutional republic, unless we begin to de-escalate.
While partisan gerrymandering is problematic, there is no easy solution. The Supreme Court in Rucho v Common Cause (2019) held that gerrymandering is a political question best handled by Congress or the states.
States can pursue reforms, but if blue states, for example, reform redistricting but red states do not, then Republicans have an advantage.
That leaves the solution in Congress’s hands. Unfortunately, Congressional parties govern for their base rather than the public. If the parties do not end the redistricting wars, Madison’s fears will come true as one party “sacrifices to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens” and imposes partisan redistricting criteria on the nation to the detriment of everyone.