AUSTIN — The U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday that it will take up a case on whether Texas' congressional and statehouse maps discriminate against minorities and need to be redrawn.

The court made the decision after considering the case under conference for a second time on Friday. It had previously discussed the case in conference a week ago.

At stake in the case are changes to Texas’ electoral maps that could buck the Republican status quo and create an opening for the growth of Democratic power in the state.

The case came to the court as two separate lawsuits, one on the congressional maps and the other on the statehouse maps. But in an order released Friday, the Supreme Court condensed the two cases into one. The order did not set a hearing date.

"We are eager for the chance to present our case before the U.S. Supreme Court, which ordered the district court in San Antonio to draw lawful congressional and House maps in 2012 that the Legislature adopted in 2013 and used in the last three elections," Attorney General Ken Paxton, who appealed the case to the Supreme Court, said in a news release. "The lower court's decisions to invalidate parts of the maps it drew and adopted is inexplicable and indefensible."

State Rep. Rafael Anchia of Dallas is the chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, one of the lead plaintiffs. He praised the court's decision to take up the case.

"Texans deserve for their votes to count. After six years in litigation, we welcome swift action from the highest court in the land. We are hopeful that the court will provide justice to voters and agree that discrimination will not be tolerated in our elections," Anchia said in a news release following the court's decision.

Anchia's statehouse district in west and northwest Dallas is among nine that a lower court found discriminatory in August. The panel of three federal judges in San Antonio said Republicans had "packed" the district with Latino voters to dilute their voting power in surrounding districts.

"Millions of votes have been cast under unconstitutional maps and we are preparing to start the process all over again in a few short years," Anchia said. "It's clear that the legislature cannot be trusted to put the best interest of Texans first."

Long-running lawsuit

The legal battle began in 2011, when civil rights organizations and minority lawmakers accused the state’s leadership of drawing electoral maps that intentionally disadvantaged Hispanic and African-American voters. After a federal court found the maps discriminatory, the Texas Legislature redrew the congressional and statehouse maps in 2013. Those maps are currently in use, but opponents added them to the legal challenge because they say the discriminatory issues carried over from the original maps.

In the two August rulings, the three-judge panel agreed with the plaintiffs, finding that two congressional districts and nine statehouse districts across four counties were intentionally discriminatory and needed to be redrawn.

Five statehouse districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth area were among those ordered to be redrawn, including Districts 103, 104 and 105 in Dallas County and 90 and 93 in Tarrant County.

The congressional districts to be redrawn were District 35 in Central Texas, represented by Democrat Lloyd Doggett, and District 27 in Corpus Christi, represented by Republican Blake Farenthold, who recently announced he will not seek re-election following sexual misconduct claims against him.

The redrawing of these districts could have a ripple effect, changing the shape of surrounding districts and creating ones in which minorities make up a larger share of the population, which could boost Democrats.

The plaintiffs had wanted the districts redrawn in time for the 2018 midterm elections, but Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Samuel Alito granted a stay in the case until the court could consider the matter further, effectively ending any chance of having the maps redrawn for this November.

High stakes

Both sides have said they relish an opportunity to argue their case in front of the Supreme Court. The Mexican American Legislative Caucus hired voting rights expert Pamela Karlan to present its case. Karlan is the co-director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Stanford University.

The Texas Democratic Party took aim at Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday over the current electoral maps. Abbott served as attorney general when the maps were drawn and has defended them during his tenure as governor.

"Today's news again shines light on Greg Abbott and Texas Republicans' pattern of discriminating against Texans of color," Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa said in a news release. "They didn't just cheat to get an edge in a silly game, they silenced the voices [of] minorities at the ballot box. We will again be before the Supreme Court to examine Texas Republicans' stacking of the deck through systemic discrimination against people of color."

The stakes are high for Texas. Before a separate 2013 Supreme Court ruling, the state was under federal supervision through the Voting Rights Act. "Pre-clearance" required Texas to receive approval from the federal government before changing its election laws. The requirement was meant to ensure that Southern states with histories of discrimination did not continue the pattern.

The plaintiffs in the redistricting lawsuit have asked the lower court in San Antonio to place the state back under pre-clearance. That could be a real threat if the Supreme Court rules against Texas and lets the lower court's ruling of intentional discrimination stand.

The court's decision to take up the Texas case marks the third redistricting case the justices will hear this term. The court will also hear cases alleging partisan gerrymandering in Maryland and Wisconsin. North Carolina also has asked the court to hear a case in which its congressional map was struck down.

CORRECTION, 4 p.m., Jan. 12, 2018: An earlier version of this story misspelled the name of Pamela Karlan.