As former President George W. Bush steps back onto the public stage, he’s facing both criticism from detractors who point to his lingering unpopularity and divisive impact on the GOP, and praise from supporters who cite the importance of “compassionate conservatism” to the modern Republican Party.

While the former two-term president has kept a relatively low profile since leaving office in 2009, focusing on private speaking engagements and his burgeoning painting hobby, he will be back in the spotlight Thursday for the dedication of his presidential library in Dallas, Texas.

His re-emergence at this week’s event – which will feature all of the United States’ five living presidents – arrives just as his lasting political legacy comes into focus.

Mladen Antonov / AFP - Getty Images

The George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum in Dallas will be dedicated on Thursday.

The controversies of the Bush administration – including the conflict in Iraq, the waging of the “global war on terror,” the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis – saddled the former Texas governor with staggering unpopularity by the end of his presidency, which helped give way to President Barack Obama’s ascendancy and an ongoing identity crisis within the GOP.

The library dedication offers Bush loyalists an opportunity to highlight what they see as the positive legacy of his eight years in office. But even among supporters, there is a sense of resignation that he won’t win the kind of historical vindication that once seemed assured.

“I’m increasingly doubtful, just because I think the lens of history is not changing,” said Ari Fleischer, Bush’s former press secretary. “A lot of us used to say President Bush will look good and he’ll be vindicated in the public eye. But realistically speaking, I don’t see a lot of the people who write history all of a sudden changing their mind about George W. Bush.”

The persistent focus on those controversies has made it difficult for Bush to repair his public image since leaving office. Thirty-five percent of Americans expressed a favorable opinion of Bush in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted at the beginning of this month; 44 percent of Americans said they viewed Bush unfavorably. (A Washington Post/ABC News poll released Tuesday featured rosier numbers for Bush – 47 percent approval vs. 50 percent disapproval.)

“He's had a little uptick in the polls, but I think in terms of historians, he'll rank near the bottom of mediocre presidents,” said strategist Bob Shrum, a top adviser to the two Democratic presidential nominees who lost to Bush, Vice President Al Gore and then-Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. “I don't think the Iraq War can be redeemed. What was done to the economy and budget will be permanently part of his legacy.”

Benny Snyder / AP

Letters written from around the world and sent to the White House offering thoughts and prayers after the 9/11 attacks are displayed at the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum in Dallas.

And while Bush might have shied away from the spotlight in the four years since leaving office, his effect in American politics is undeniable. The specter of Bush was a constant presence during the 2012 campaign, when Obama warned that his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, would return the country to the “failed policies of the past.”

A further study in contrast came during last summer’s Republican National Convention, where Bush was nowhere to be found in Tampa. Former President Bill Clinton, rather, was one of the featured prime-time speakers at his party’s confab, a stark reminder of the popularity gap between the two.

For Bush supporters, the economic collapse in 2008, along with Katrina and the extended conflict in Iraq, are blemishes against him – but they do not believe that he deserves to shoulder the primary blame. And for those allies of the former president who have toured the library (and continue to defend their former boss), they describe the new library as a blunt and forthright assessment of the Bush presidency.

“I think visitors are going to be surprised to see a frank discussion of what was done and why it was done,” Fleischer said. “It doesn’t shy away from controversy. The museum takes on the biggest issues for which the president was criticized.”

For all of the baggage that continues to surround Bush’s eight years in office, many of his supporters argue that the unpopular former president’s record offers Republicans more clues about their path to resurgence than cautionary tales.

Bush, for instance, unsuccessfully led a charge for comprehensive immigration reform in 2007, an initiative which conservatives are now revisiting amid the GOP’s slide with Hispanic voters. (Bush won 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004.)

And following some of the harsher conservatism of congressional Republicans in the 1990s, Bush tried to put a somewhat softer face on the party – much as the party is trying to do now – during his 2000 bid for the presidency.

“He established the idea of compassionate conservatism, which is a concept that most Republicans realize was a winning message and one the party needs to return to in order to win,” said Mark McKinnon, a senior political adviser to Bush’s two presidential campaigns.

Benny Snyder / AP

An exhibit is shown in the museum area at the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum in Dallas.

Those aspects of Bush’s political strategy are what helped make him such a formidable opponent, according to Shrum.

“The attempt he made with Kennedy and McCain to do immigration reform was right on the merits, but also right on the money politically as well,” he said.

But as the party he helped cleave continues to search for a path forward, Bush himself said that he did not think the GOP is so hopelessly moribund that it’s beyond repair.

“The party ought to nominate somebody who can stand by principles and explain why conservative principles are better for the vast majority of the citizens,” Bush told Parade Magazine in an interview published last Sunday. “I’m not one who believes that the Republican Party is doomed forever.”

The person to do that might end up being Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida and the brother of George W. Bush. Of his younger sibling’s future potential ambitions, Bush said: “I hope he will run.”

Related story:

• Bush is back - but not his popularity

This story was originally published on Wed Apr 24, 2013 4:37 AM EDT

Updated at 10:53 p.m. ET: Tea Party-backed Ted Cruz won the primary runoff contest for the Texas Senate seat Tuesday night with over half of the vote, beating Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who was the winner of a plurality of the vote in the initial primary election in June. Dewhurst conceded Tuesday night.

Cruz will face Rep. Paul Sadler in the general election, which will determine the successor to retiring Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R). Sadler beat former educator Grady Yarbrough in Tuesday's primary with two-thirds of the vote.

But given the Republican dominance in Texas, the seat is seen as likely to remain in GOP control, which made Tuesday’s runoff a somewhat de facto general election.

Live stream video test

The Dewhurst-Cruz battle marked another chapter in the battle between the establishment and insurgent wings of the Republican Party, splitting Republicans along familiar dividing lines.

Dewhurst had been able to outraise his primary opponents in part thanks to his long time in government and his support from Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R), whose highly-regarded staff had managed his campaign.

But after Dewhurst failed to win an outright majority in the June 2 primary – which would have secured for him the nomination – conservatives who had opposed the lieutenant governor rallied around Cruz as the conservative alternative in the primary runoff.

Familiar Republican figures who had propelled other upstart conservatives in primaries had rallied around Cruz. South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint endorsed the former solicitor general, and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum each stumped for Cruz last weekend in Texas.

Cruz, a Cuban-American who had served as a onetime clerk to the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, had been the favorite going into the primary on Tuesday. But Dewhurst supporters held out hope that early voting might carry the day for his campaign.

Texas seems likely to have a more conservative senator in Washington come next January. The outgoing Hutchison is regarded as a generally Republican, but had drawn conservatives’ ire for supporting abortion rights and the 2008 Wall Street bailout program.

The state-by-state battle over voter eligibility is not only being fought in the court of public opinion, but in actual courtrooms as well.

Since state rules help determine who ends up getting to vote, it’s possible that new voter identification requirements enacted since the 2008 election could make a difference on Nov. 6 in a few states where there are close presidential, House, and Senate contests.

Even as his department’s lawyers are fighting against Texas and other states in court, Attorney General Eric Holder joined the rhetorical melee last week in a speech to the NAACP by comparing voter ID laws to states’ poll taxes which were banned nearly 50 years ago. Holder said some people "would have to travel great distances” to get state-issued ID cards “and some would struggle to pay for those documents necessary to get them." He said, “We call those poll taxes.”

Poll taxes, which had often been used to deter blacks from voting in Southern states, were outlawed in federal elections by the 24th Amendment to the Constitution in 1964 and in state elections by a Supreme Court decision in 1966.

Holder’s analogy drew a sharp retort from Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who said Holder “once again defamed my state, and our state legislature, by equating our common sense voter I.D. law with a poll tax.  By invoking the specter of Jim Crow racism, the attorney general is playing the lowest form of identity politics.”

Here’s the state of play on the litigation over who gets to vote in some key states:

New Hampshire (4 electoral votes; 2008 winner: Obama with 54 percent)
Last month the Republican-controlled state legislature overrode Democratic Gov. John Lynch’s veto of a voter ID bill. The state is covered by Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act which requires it to get pre-approval -- called “preclearance” -- from the Justice Department or from the federal court in Washington before implementing any changes in voting procedures. A Justice Department official said DOJ’s determination will be issued on Sept. 5.

Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney will be campaigning in the state, which the NBC News Political Unit rates as a toss-up, on Friday.

Wisconsin (10 electoral votes; 2008 winner: Obama with 56 percent)
In two different challenges, two county court judges in Wisconsin have issued injunctions barring enforcement of the voter ID law which Republican Gov. Scott Walker signed last year.

One of those injunctions was issued Tuesday by Dane County Judge David Flanagan, who last year signed the petition to get Walker recalled from office. The recall effort failed on June 5 when Walker won with 53 percent of the vote.

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, a Republican, announced Wednesday that the state is appealing Flanagan’s decision. The NBC News Political Unit rates the state a toss-up.

Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes; 2008 winner: Obama with 54 percent)
The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and other groups have sued to block enforcement of the voter ID law signed by Republican Gov. Tom Corbett in March.

A trial will begin in state court next Wednesday in Harrisburg, Pa., -before Judge Robert Simpson.

An assessment by Pennsylvania Secretary of State Carol Aichele’s office found that 91 percent of the state’s 8.2 million registered voters have Pennsylvania Department of Transportation issued licenses which are acceptable ID for voting.

It also reported that names of nearly 760,000 voters couldn’t be matched between the state’s voter list and the driver’s license database. Aichele spokesman Nick Winkler said this number included some simple name mismatches between one database and another – “Dave Smith” versus  “David B. Smith” for example – and that some of the 760,000 do in fact possess valid IDs for voting.

The law also says other forms of ID are acceptable, such as military ID cards, U.S. passports, identification cards from accredited Pennsylvania colleges or universities, Pennsylvania senior care facility IDs, or other photo identification cards issued by the federal, Pennsylvania, county or municipal governments.

Someone without any of those forms of ID can go to one of the more than 70 state Department of Transportation offices and get a state-issued ID.

But David Gersch, an attorney with Arnold & Porter in Washington who is one of the lawyers seeking to have the law blocked, said the state “just doesn’t have the wherewithal to issue that many IDs. It’s just not going to get done” before Election Day.

Gersch said Judge Simpson’s ruling will probably be issued within ten days of the trial’s ending.

The NBC News Political Unit rates Pennsylvania “lean Democratic.”

Florida (29 electoral votes, 2008 winner: Obama with 51 percent)
In the toss-up state of Florida -- where President Barack Obama is campaigning Thursday -- the controversy isn't over voter identification, but over an effort by Republican Gov. Rick Scott and Secretary of State Ken Detzner to have people ineligible to vote removed from the voter rolls.

The Justice Department sued Detzner over this effort, contending that the 1993 National Voter Registration Act doesn't allow states, within 90 days of an election, to conduct a systematic program to remove ineligible people from its voter lists. (Florida’s primary is on August 14.)

Last month, federal district court Judge Robert Hinkle ruled that the way the state first went about its eligibility checking was flawed and “was likely to have a discriminatory impact” on newly naturalized citizens. (About 87,000 Florida residents became naturalized citizens in 2011.)

But Hinkle also said the initial state effort did find a small number of non-citizens who were registered to vote and the evidence “suggests that some actually voted in the past.”

He ruled that a state “can remove an improperly registered noncitizen” from the list of eligible voters, even during the 90-day window prior to an election. 

The Department of Homeland Security had refused Florida’s request to cross-check names of people suspected of being ineligible to vote with a federal databases of non-citizens. After Hinkle’s ruling, DHS reversed itself and allowed Florida to use the database.

Five counties in Florida are covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The American Civil Liberties Union and a Latino voter mobilization group called the Mi Familia Vota Education Fund filed suit last month to try to stop the Florida voter eligibility effort, contending that the state had failed to get section 5 permission from the Justice Department or from a federal court.

Virginia (13 electoral votes; 2008 winner: Obama with 53 percent)
In Virginia -- yet another state rated a toss-up by NBC News -- Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell signed a law allowing voters who show up at the polling place on Election Day without an acceptable form of ID to cast a provisional ballot and then present an approved ID up until the Friday after the election in order to have their vote counted.

He also directed the State Board of Elections to send every voter in the state a voter card before Election Day so that every registered voter has a valid ID to present at the polls.

Virginia law doesn’t require photo identification to vote. In the state, acceptable forms of voter ID include a Virginia driver’s license, a valid student identification card issued by a Virginia college or university, a copy of a current utility bill, or a paycheck that shows the name and address of the voter.

The Justice Department will issue its determination of whether the new Virginia law complies with section 5 of the Voting Rights Act on Aug. 20.

Texas (38 electoral votes; 2008 winner: McCain with 55 percent)
Like Virginia and Florida, Texas is one of the states covered by section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Last week testimony ended in federal district court in Washington in Texas’s suit against Holder, as the state tries to get the court to approve the voter identification law which was enacted last year.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott’s office said the Justice Department had “relied on flawed data, inaccurate information and unreliable expert conclusions” to support Holder's decision to block the Texas law.

According to one of the attorneys representing clients who seek to overturn the law, J. Gerald Hebert of the Campaign Legal Center, the three-judge panel indicated it will issue a ruling next month.  

Hebert contends that the Texas law is “a solution in search of a problem” and that the state legislature’s motivation in passing it was to suppress voting by Latinos and African-Americans.  

Lauren Bean, a spokeswoman for Abbott, said if the federal court denies preclearance, the state will appeal. The NBC News Political Unit rates Texas as “likely Republican.”

President Obama heads to Texas, the Romney Veepstakes Heat Up, more Campaigning in the Midwest and what's with all the booing? 

HOUSTON -- Mitt Romney likely didn't win any votes at the national NAACP convention on Wednesday, but the African American atendees gave the presumptive GOP nominee credit nonetheless for trying.

The crowd gathered in Texas for the civil rights group's annual meeting booed Romney for vowing to repeal President Obama's health care reform law.

Evan Vucci / AP

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks before the NAACP annual convention July 11 in Houston, Texas.

"I'm going to eliminate every non-essential, expensive program I can find. That includes Obamacare," Romney told the overwhelmingly African American membership gathered for his address, as a chorus of boos forced the candidate to stop his speech for fifteen seconds, then veer off script to defend his position.

But this audience was never likely to be a friendly crowd for the presumptive GOP nominee, with African American voters supporting President Obama over John McCain 95 to 4 percent in 2008, and with current polls showing a similar split in this election cycle. Romney made note of the tough room with a joke at the start of his remarks.

"I appreciate the chance to speak first – even before Vice President Biden gets his turn tomorrow," Romney said. "I just hope the Obama campaign won’t think you’re playing favorites." 

Several attendees said after the speech that while they appreciated Romney appearing here, he would never win their support.

"I give him kudos for coming here, I really do. He had nerves," said Betty Bush, a retired auto worker from Alabama, who then added she could think of "nothing," that she agreed with in Romney's remarks.

"I thought it was courageous for him and gracious of him to come, and we really appreciate that," said Steven Goings, who traveled to Texas from Monterrey, California for the convention. "Certainly I disagree with most of what he says, but that's to be expected."

The candidate made several attempts to reach out to the black community specifically in his speech: highlighting his father's work on civil rights in the 1960's, pledging to improve the job market for blacks, who suffer from a disproportionately high 14.4 percent unemployment rate, and highlighting his education reform work as Massachusetts governor.

Romney's comments on education -- specifically his often-told story of protecting charter schools in Massachusetts with the help of the black caucus in the Massachusetts legislature -- appeared to be the most popular element of his speech today, here in the home city of the successful KIPP charter school system.

"We need Obamacare," said Liz Cotton, a grandmother from Virginia, when asked what she thought of Romney's speech, adding:"I agree with him on Charter schools. I think charter schools are really good."

Campaign officials said they were pleased with the reception Romney received overall, noting many of his positions -- including pushing back against China on trade issues -- earned notable applause. Several political analysts also noted today that Romney's audience today was broader than just those in the room if he could appeal to moderates and independents just by showing up at the convention. (As the Republican nominee in 2008 John McCain also spoke to the group, as did then-Senator Obama, who begged off this year citing scheduling conflicts)

But on the economic argument that he could be a better president for people of all colors in America -- the core of Romney's campaign message -- Romney appeared to make little headway with this audience.

"I wouldn't say there was nothing to his argument," said Goings, offering faint praise, and adding that he would "certainly" be voting for Obama again this year.

Romney was interrupted with boos twice more for criticizing the president in the course of a twenty five minute address to an audience that was likely the least-supportive one he has spoken to all campaign season. He earned only smatterings of applause for his policy positions, but ultimately receiving a brief, cordial standing ovation from the several hundred attendees as he wrapped up his remarks.

Mitt Romney found himself on the receiving end of a loud chorus of boos when he promised to repeal health care reform during a speech before the NAACP.

"If our goal is jobs, we have to stop spending over a trillion dollars more than we take in every year. So to do that, I'm going to eliminate every non-essential, expensive program I can find. That includes Obamacare, and I'm going to work to reform and save -- " Romney said, being interrupted by boos.

Romney otherwise encountered polite applause in his speech, which hit on themes of jobs and the economy -- mainstays of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee's overall stump speech -- as well as education reform.

The former Massachusetts governor faced an uphill task politically in speaking before the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), one of the most historic and well-established civil rights groups. President Barack Obama, as the nation's first black president, enjoys tremendous levels of support and enthusiasm from black voters, who helped propel Obama to office in 2008 in key swing states.

Romney joked about the fact that he's unlikely to win over many African American voters. "I appreciate the chance to speak first -- even before Vice President Biden gets his turn tomorrow," he said. "I just hope the Obama campaign won’t think you’re playing favorites."

But the speech, overall, was intended to portray his candidacy as one for all Americans, unified by a theme of improving the economy. Romney pledged to return to speak before the NAACP at its convention next year, should he be elected.

Romney also spoke with reverence toward the legacy of his father, Michigan Gov. George Romney, a Republican who broke with his party at times over the issue of civil rights.

"For every one of us a particular person comes to mind, someone who set a standard of conduct and made us better by their example. For me, that man is my father, George Romney," he said, detailing some of his father's work to advance civil rights.

Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters.

In remarks to the NAACP in Houston, the attorney general said the Justice Department "will not allow political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens of their most precious right."

Pat Sullivan / AP

Attorney General Eric Holder says he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters.

Under the law passed in Texas, Holder said that "many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them — and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them."

"We call those poll taxes," Holder added spontaneously, drawing applause as he moved away from the original text of his speech with a reference to a fee used in some Southern states after slavery's abolition to disenfranchise black people.

The 24th amendment to the constitution made that type of tax illegal.

Holder spoke a day after a trial started in federal court in Washington over the 2011 law passed by Texas' GOP-dominated Legislature that requires voters to show photo identification when they get to the polls.

Under Texas' law, Holder noted, a concealed handgun license would serve as acceptable ID to vote, but a student ID would not. He went on to say that while only 8 percent of white people do not have government-issued photo IDs, about 25 percent of black people lack such identification.

"I don't know what will happen as this case moves forward, but I can assure you that the Justice Department's efforts to uphold and enforce voting rights will remain aggressive," the attorney general said.

Holder said the arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate and that "we will simply not allow this era to be the beginning of the reversal of that historic progress."

"I will not allow that to happen," he added.

The attorney general spoke at the 103rd convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which is launching a battle against new state voter ID laws. NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous has likened the fight against conservative-backed voter ID laws passed in several states to "Selma and Montgomery times," referring to historic Alabama civil rights confrontations of the mid-1960s.

Holder, the first black man named U.S. Attorney General, was received with resounding applause, a standing ovation and chants of "Holder, Holder, Holder" at the convention.

Those chants quickly changed to "stand your ground, stand your ground," a reference to a Florida law that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman is using to defend fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager he encountered while patrolling his community in February. Police did not initially arrest or charge Zimmerman, saying the "stand your ground" law allowed self-defense. He was later charged with second-degree murder.

Holder said the Justice Department under his leadership has taken unprecedented steps to study and prevent violence against youth and address the high homicide rate among young black men.

Finally, the attorney general noted with pride that the U.S. Supreme Court in two recent rulings regarding President Barack Obama's health care law and immigration laws passed in Arizona, largely supported the federal government and the Department of Justice. However, he said, he remained concerned that Arizona law enforcement, under the portion of the law upheld by the court, would be able to check the immigration status of any person suspected of being in the United States illegally.

"No American should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like," Holder said.

Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

Mitt Romney walks to an awaiting car after walking off of his campaign plane at McCarran International Airport on May 29, 2012 in Las Vegas.

Updated 9:45 p.m. ET -- Mitt Romney won the Republican primary in Texas on Tuesday, a victory that gives him more than the 1,144 delegates needed to secure his party's presidential nomination.

Following a bruising primary season earlier this year that extended longer than many Republicans had hoped, NBC News projected that Romney had finally won the necessary delegates to secure the nomination, though the former Massachusetts governor won’t earn the official nod until August's Republican National Convention in Tampa.

The race for the Republican nomination has been largely over since the April 3 primary in Wisconsin. Romney's win in that contest prompted the eventual withdrawals of his remaining rivals: Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul. It also hastened the onset of President Barack Obama's own re-election offensive versus Romney.

"I am honored that Americans across the country have given their support to my candidacy and I am humbled to have won enough delegates to become the Republican Party's 2012 presidential nominee," Romney said in a statement Tuesday evening. "Our party has come together with the goal of putting the failures of the last three and a half years behind us."

Romney spent the evening at a closed-doors fundraiser in Las Vegas with Gingrich and reality television star Donald Trump.

While conservatives appear to have rallied behind the former Massachusetts governor, the long campaign season was not without its consequences for Romney.

The Republican has been fundraising aggressively to make up for money spent during the nomination battle, which depleted, in part, his relative financial parity versus Obama. 

But more significantly, the Obama campaign has been turning some of the most stinging attacks on Romney from other Republicans and revived them for use in the general election.

"I have no illusions about the difficulties of the task before us. But whatever challenges lie ahead, we will settle for nothing less than getting America back on the path to full employment and prosperity," Romney said in his victory statement. "On November 6, I am confident that we will unite as a country and begin the hard work of fulfilling the American promise and restoring our country to greatness.”

Case-in-point: the Obama campaign has spent much of the past two weeks attacking Romney's experience at Bain Capital, the private equity firm Romney had co-founded. That is a line of attack first advanced by Gingrich and Texas Gov. Rick Perry in January.

Romney's continued advantage versus Obama, though, lies with an economic recovery that still rests on precarious footing.

May's NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that half of Americans judged last month's jobs report as unsatisfactory. That dampened optimism for a recovery -- and, in turn, for Obama -- could become a potent political weapon for Romney, especially if continued economic unrest in Europe slows the pace of the recovery in the U.S.

Texas is all but certain to have an even later say in choosing the Republican presidential nominee after what at first looked like a breakthrough deal in a bitter dispute over redistricting maps ended with wide rejection of the proposal.

That left the date of the Texas primaries in limbo Tuesday, a day after a court-imposed deadline for the state and minority advocacy groups to compromise came and went without temporary maps that everyone could agree on for the 2012 elections.

A San Antonio federal court had told both sides to reach a deal by Monday or see the April 3 primary date pushed back a second time. The Texas attorney general's office appeared to hit the deadline by announcing an agreement with some of the groups, but that was soon overshadowed by other prominent black and Hispanic organizations blasting the deal.

The court also appeared to reject the partial deal, as U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia urged talks to continue toward "a general agreement between all" parties.

Related: Messy caucuses in Nevada, Iowa raise questions 

Now the date of the Texas primaries is in doubt again.

Republicans feared that another delay could prevent Texas voters from helping decide which GOP candidate challenges President Barack Obama in November. Republican and Democratic party leaders have said an April 17 vote may be possible absent a deal if the court could quickly draw revised maps.

The advocacy groups are suing the state, alleging that the Republican-controlled Legislature ignored the state's burgeoning Hispanic population when it redrew boundaries for congressional and state legislative districts.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott had optimistically introduced the partially agreed plan earlier Monday. It had the backing of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of the largest groups that sued the state.

Under the proposal, Hispanics would control two of four new congressional seats that Texas was awarded following the 2010 census, which reflected the state's population boom in the last decade. But apart from MALDEF and Democratic U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas, most others involved in the lawsuit said the proposal fell far short of a fair compromise.

Luis Vera, an attorney for the League of United Latin American Citizens, scoffed at the new deal and accused the state of overselling the number of plaintiffs that signed off on it. Late Monday, his group and six of the other nine plaintiffs filed court briefs formally opposing the plan.

Vera said talks had halted, adding: "There's no agreement, and there's nothing to talk about."

In a written statement late Monday, Abbott didn't acknowledge the judge's order but said his office "has worked with a wide range of interest groups to incorporate reasonable requests from all parties" without compromising the will of the Texas Legislature. He has said a primary likely couldn't be organized before April 17.

When asked earlier Monday if he was happy with the proposed compromise, Abbott said "it's a step in the right direction." He said failure to reach a consensus wasn't for a lack of trying.

MALDEF attorney Nina Perales said the maps put forward by Abbott came very close to what her organization requested. She said that in addition to creating two new Hispanic-dominated congressional districts, the plan also created two Hispanic-majority districts in the Texas House and restored two Hispanic districts in the Rio Grande Valley and Nueces County.

"Although they are not perfect, the plans that have been released by the state today ... more fairly reflect the growing strength of Latino voters in Texas," Perales said. "They properly recognize that protecting voting rights is more important than partisanship or incumbency protection."

But most of the groups suing the state said the deal was no compromise. The Mexican American Legislative Caucus argued that the new plan actually dilutes minority influence in some areas. Its chairman, Democratic state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, said the two Hispanic congressional seats would come on the condition of losing ground in other districts currently dominated by Hispanic voters.

"If you tell me we're going to get these seats at the expense of another district, that's not a win," he said.

In Washington, another federal court is weighing a separate case challenging whether maps drawn by the Texas Legislature were legal. Since Texas is one of nine states with a history of racial discrimination, the Washington court or the U.S. Department of Justice must pre-approve any changes to state election laws. A ruling in that case isn't expected for at least another month.

The stakes are unusually high because the nation's second-largest state is adding four congressional seats — and the way they are divvyed up could be pivotal in determining which party controls the U.S. House.

The Texas Legislature got the first crack at drawing new maps for Congress and the Statehouse, but their plan was quickly challenged by Cuellar and minority groups.

If the court rejects the compromise, the judges could split the primaries into two elections — one for the presidential race, and a later one for state and congressional elections that are at the mercy of where map lines are settled.

A split primary would let parties hold their conventions on schedule — but could cost taxpayers $15 million.

Republican legislative leaders argued that they drew the original maps merely to benefit their party's candidates, but minority groups claim they discriminate by diluting the voting power of blacks and Hispanics. All states must redraw political districts following the census every 10 years to adjust for population changes.

Updated 1:45 pm ET

The Supreme Court Friday morning rejected interim maps drawn by a federal court in Texas that created new lines for congressional and state legislative districts in the state.

Texas gained four seats in the House of Representatives, due to population growth as measured by the 2010 Census.

The justices ordered the three-judge court in San Antonio to devise new plans, paying more heed to the plans drawn by the Texas legislature.

Pete Williams of NBC News said Friday’s decision will make it hard for Texas to have its primary election in April.  It has already been delayed a month, from March. 

On his Election Law Blog, University of California, Irvine, law professor Rick Hasen wrote that the high court's ruling "is a big win for Texas, and will require the drawing of districts much more likely to favor Texas’s interim plan...." But Hasen added,  "At most these lines will last for one election" since Texas is awaiting the approval of its redistricting maps from the Justice Department and the outcome of further litigation in the case.

Karen Bleier / AFP - Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.

In an unsigned opinion, the justices said that the federal court in Texas erred to the extent that it “exceeded its mission” to draw interim maps for the 2012 elections that do not violate the Constitution or the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The Texas court had wrongly “substituted its own concept of ‘the collective public good’ for the Texas Legislature’s determination ...” the justices said.

The high court also said that the Texas court “appears to have unnecessarily ignored the State’s plans in drawing certain individual districts.”

Civil rights groups had challenged the maps drawn by the Texas legislature, arguing that they discriminate against Latinos and African-Americans and dilute the voting strength of those groups.

Under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Texas is one of nine states that must get permission, or “preclearance,” from the Justice Department for any change in voting procedures they seek to make. The Texas redistricting plans are still in the process of getting that approval from the Justice Department.

The high court said Friday that even though the Texas legislature’s redistricting plans have not yet gotten Justice Department approval, “that does not mean that the plan is of no account or that the policy judgments it reflects can be disregarded by a district court drawing an interim plan. On the contrary, the state plan serves as a starting point for the district court.”

In a statement Friday, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot said that the high court's ruling made clear "that the district court must give deference to elected leaders of this state, and it's clear by the Supreme Court ruling that the district court abandoned these guiding principles. The Supreme Court's swift decision will allow Texas to move forward with elections as soon as possible, under maps that are lawful."

But Nina Perales, the vice president of litigation at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund said, "We believe the (Texas legislature's redistricting ) plans discriminate against Latino voters and are pleased that the Supreme Court refused to allow Texas to proceed with its discriminatory redistricting plans. We look forward to further proceedings in the federal court in Texas to again secure fair interim maps for all Texans."