In a statement, Malliotakis said the justices had “stopped the voters on Staten Island and in southern Brooklyn from being stripped of their ability to elect a representative who reflects their values.”
The case centers on New York’s 11th Congressional District, the only district in New York City currently held by a Republican.
The dispute is one of several mid-cycle redistricting battles that have reached the Supreme Court after President Donald Trump encouraged Republicans to pursue map changes that could strengthen the party’s position in Congress.
Texas redrew its congressional map, and California voters approved a ballot measure revising that state’s map in a way that favored Democrats.
In both instances, legal challenges were brought to the Supreme Court, and the justices allowed the new maps to be used for the midterms.
The New York case also unfolds as the court considers a separate voting rights dispute, Louisiana v. Callais, involving the creation of a second majority minority district in Louisiana.
A ruling in that case could have broader implications for congressional maps nationwide.
In the New York matter, the court’s three liberal justices dissented.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote in a 13-page dissent that the court had inserted itself into election law disputes during an active redistricting cycle.
“By granting these applications, the court thrusts itself into the middle of every election law dispute around the country, even as many states redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election,” Sotomayor wrote.
She warned that the decision could prompt more emergency appeals “without even bothering to ask the state courts first.”
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing in concurrence, said he supported blocking the lower court’s order.
