Pretty sure plenty of those districts are not VRA-compliant. It's not enough for a district to have a majority of electors from a particular demographic group, they also have to be able to elect the candidate of their choice. In several of those districts Hispanics can't, because although they're a clear majority of the population their turnout rates are sufficiently low that they'll get outvoted by whites.
What's more, several of them fail the Gingles test both on the grounds of both compactness and cohesiveness - it's hard to argue that Laredo Hispanics are essentially equivalent to Lubbock Hispanics in terms of political behaviour.
I definitely agree, and I would never be a proponent of that map (which is a peak GOP gerrymander). However, with the Supreme Court as it is right now, it's unclear if those rules still stand, and I could see a Republican legislature in 2020 draw an especially offensive gerrymander to force the issue.
The growth in Austin, Houston, and DFW has been so massive over the last 10 years that anything drawn with equal 2010 populations is pretty much worthless.
The concept remains the same though - just juggle some of the territory around and maybe crack into the few Titanium R districts left. Bottom line is that the peak for Texas R's is an 11-28 or 12-27 map.
