Florida Supreme Court Upholds Congressional Redistricting Map
On Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the state’s congressional redistricting map, dismissing a challenge that contested the removal of a majority-Black district in north Florida. The map was initially proposed by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis. For more details, visit the Associated Press article.
The court’s decision, formed by justices appointed by DeSantis, concluded that reinstating the previously existing district, which spanned from Jacksonville to west of Tallahassee over 200 miles (322 kilometers), would constitute racial gerrymandering. The majority opinion stated that such an action would breach the Constitution’s equal protection guidelines.
Chief Justice Carlos Muniz noted, “The record leaves no doubt that such a district would be race-predominant. The record also gives us no reasonable basis to think that further litigation would uncover a potentially viable remedy.”
As a result of this ruling, the current congressional districts, which favor Republicans with a 20-8 lead over Democrats, will remain intact through the 2026 midterm elections. The district in question was previously represented by Al Lawson, a Black Democrat, but now falls under the jurisdiction of three Republican districts.
A panel of three federal judges had also upheld the current district configurations.
Governor DeSantis remarked on X, “This was always the constitutionally correct map — and now both the federal courts and the FL Supreme Court have upheld it.”
The National Redistricting Foundation, one of the plaintiffs, expressed concern over the decision, stating that it reduces the voting influence of Black residents in Florida. Marina Jenkins, the foundation’s executive director, commented, “The court is abandoning the most basic role of the judiciary: to provide justice for the people.”
Initially, the Florida Legislature had proposed redistricting plans that maintained the Black voting power in the north Florida district. However, following a veto by DeSantis, the governor successfully advocated for the current map that excludes it.
The Supreme Court’s ruling highlighted a key issue for the plaintiffs: the absence of a viable alternative map proposal. The court stated, “It is not enough in the redistricting context for challengers to identify a flaw in an enacted districting plan and demand that the court send the Legislature back to the drawing board.”
Justice Jorge Labarga dissented from the majority opinion, arguing for the case to be returned to a lower court for further examination, allowing challengers an opportunity to propose alternative district configurations. Labarga wrote, “By foreclosing further litigation, the majority’s decision now allows to remain in place a congressional redistricting plan that is unconstitutional under the Florida Constitution.”
