Maryland ballot measure · November 3, 2026
Maryland Question 3, explained
Removing constitutional criteria for congressional districts. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.
The official wording
Constitutional Amendment (Ch. 881 of the 2026 Legislative Session) — Election Districts. FOR the purpose of clarifying that certain requirements apply only to districts for the election of members of the Senate of Maryland and the House of Delegates; authorizing the General Assembly to grant original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of Maryland to review the congressional districting plan of the State; and providing that nothing in the Maryland Constitution provides applicable criteria for the boundaries of a congressional districting plan. (Amending Article III of the Maryland Constitution) [ ] For the Constitutional Amendment [ ] Against the Constitutional Amendment
This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.
What it actually means
The Maryland Constitution says districts must be contiguous, compact, roughly equal in population, and drawn with regard for natural and political boundaries. In 2022 a state judge, Lynne Battaglia, held that those rules apply to congressional districts as well as state legislative ones. This amendment would say they apply only to state legislative districts, and that nothing in the Maryland Constitution sets criteria for congressional district boundaries. It would also let the legislature send congressional map challenges straight to the Supreme Court of Maryland. It does not itself redraw any map, and would not affect the 2026 congressional election.
If you vote YES
- The contiguity, compactness, equal population and natural-and-political-boundaries requirements in Article III, Section 4 would apply only to Maryland Senate and House of Delegates districts.
- A new Section 62 would state that nothing in the constitution, including the Declaration of Rights, provides applicable criteria for the boundaries of a congressional districting plan.
- The General Assembly could grant original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of Maryland to review the state's congressional districting plan, sending challenges directly to the high court.
- The 2022 Battaglia ruling, which applied the state constitutional criteria to congressional maps, would be nullified.
- No congressional map changes as a result. The amendment removes a constraint on future maps; the 2026 congressional election is unaffected.
If you vote NO
- The state constitutional criteria would continue to apply to congressional districts as the 2022 ruling held, so any new congressional map could be challenged in state court on contiguity, compactness, population equality and respect for county and natural boundaries.
- The General Assembly could not route congressional map challenges directly to the Supreme Court of Maryland.
- Maryland's current eight-seat congressional map, drawn after the 2020 census — seven seats held by Democrats and one by a Republican — stays in place either way.
- Federal law, including the U.S. Constitution's population-equality requirement and the Voting Rights Act, would continue to apply to any map.
Why supporters say YES
"During this special session, we are clarifying the rules by which we will draw maps to ensure we are using the standards the state used for decades prior. … We've known that we cannot consider any future map in the near term or the long term without first addressing the uncertainty that the 2022 Battaglia decision created. If we want a future legislature to have meaningful options, we must address this issue first."
— Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-46)
"Maryland will not be caught flat-footed while Republicans engage in political redlining that guts decades of progress that the generations before us fought for. By passing this constitutional amendment, the General Assembly has ensured that Maryland remains committed to being part of that conversation—and that the final decision will rest where it belongs: with the people of Maryland."
— Gov. Wes Moore (D)
"As protections under the Voting Rights Act have been weakened and states across the country continue to redraw congressional districts, we are very proud to join those across Maryland stepping up to defend democracy."
— Christopher C. Cano, director of political and legislative affairs, SEIU Local 500; the supporting campaign is Fight Back MD
Why opponents say NO
"They are disenfranchising my Republican voters by saying, 'We are going to draw a map based on your political speech, how you register and how you vote. We're going to discriminate against you because of that.'"
— U.S. Rep. Andy Harris (R), Maryland's 1st Congressional District
"Partisan gerrymandering, regardless of the party who benefits, and the circumstances used to justify it, is undemocratic and wrong. It is a primary contributor to the gridlock and dysfunction in the U.S. Congress… [The amendment] enables partisan gerrymandering and will only enable this dysfunction."
— Maryland Forward Party
"My hope was that we could balance out what the Democrats are going to pass with Citizens being sovereign over the redistricting process. It is just raw partisan politics from the national level having more influence than what is best for Maryland citizens regardless of what part of the state you live."
— State Del. Christopher Eric Bouchat (R-5)
What’s genuinely uncertain
- The amendment does not draw a map and does not commit the state to drawing one. Whether Maryland redistricts mid-decade would be a later decision of the General Assembly.
- What standards would govern a future congressional map if the amendment passes is the central unknown: state constitutional criteria would no longer apply, leaving federal law and whatever the legislature chooses to follow.
- Question 3 arose from a 2026 special session, in a national context: as of August 2026 ten states — Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas and Utah — had adopted new congressional maps mid-decade, most without a vote of the people.
- Opposition to the amendment is not uniform: it includes Republican officials and the state Republican party, and also groups such as the Maryland Forward Party that oppose partisan gerrymandering by either party.
The bottom line
Whether the compactness and boundary rules in Maryland's constitution should stop applying to congressional maps, freeing a future legislature to redraw them; supporters say the state needs the same options other states have taken and that voters should decide, opponents say it clears the way for partisan gerrymandering.
One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.
Checking it against the official text
The Maryland State Board of Elections publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.
Confirm this with the official source
Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at Maryland State Board of Elections.
Other measures on the Maryland ballot
Candidates on the same ballot
- Maryland governor's race
- Maryland's 1st congressional district
- Maryland's 2nd congressional district
- Maryland's 3rd congressional district
- Maryland's 4th congressional district
- Maryland's 5th congressional district
- Maryland's 6th congressional district
- Maryland's 7th congressional district