for a look at the legal and political implications of the decision, we're joined by richard hasen, professor of law and political science at the university of california irvine school of law; and shira toeplitz, a political reporter for "roll call," who has been closely following the texas case. >> professor hasen what had texas republicans asked the supreme court to do in the first place. how did the case get there and what were they supposed to be doing, redrawing making their own map? >> what happened is texas because of its history of discrimination is one of the states that needs federal aproving before they can make changing in voting laws including redistricting laws and trying to get them approved through federal court in washington d.c. and while that's on going another court in texas is drawing temporary maps around it has to be done to know what maps to use with the redistricting. the court said the standard they used in drawing the maps is wrong and now sent back for redrawing under new standards to give more deference to the texas legislature's own maps. >> back to the same cour