Judge rules Ron DeSantis’ congressional map wrongly diminished Black voting power

State of Florida flag map isolated on a white background, U.S.A.

A judge ordered the Florida Legislature to produce a new congressional map with a minority-majority seat in North Florida. If the ruling stands, that could have long-and short-term political ramifications for the next eight years.

Restoring a district controlled by Black voters will almost certainly change the partisan makeup of Florida’s congressional delegation by creating one more Democratic-leaning seat. The ruling could also firmly cement restrictions from the Fair Districts amendment to guide redistricting in coming decades.

Leon Circuit Court Judge Lee Marsh ruled in favor of plaintiffs suing the state over its current map. Marsh said a map demanded by Gov. Ron DeSantis violated Florida’s Constitution by diminishing Black voters’ ability to elect a Representative of their choice. He also rejected an argument from DeSantis that drawing a district that protects the influence of Black voters violates the “equal protection clause” of the U.S. Constitution.

“This case is about whether the Legislature, in enacting its most recent congressional redistricting plan, violated the Florida Constitution by diminishing the ability of Black voters in North Florida to elect representatives of their choice. It is also about whether that provision of the Florida Constitution violates the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” Marsh wrote. “In short, the answers are yes and no, respectively.”

The cartography, in place for the 2022 Midterms, dismantled a district represented by former U.S. Rep. Al Lawson, a Tallahassee Democrat. The district spanned from Tallahassee to Jackson and included many predominantly Black communities. Those included Gadsden County, Florida’s only majority Black county, and heavily Black neighborhoods near Downtown Jacksonville.

DeSantis argued that district, put in place by a Florida Supreme Court ruling in 2015, violated the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection clause. He called it an “unconstitutional gerrymander” drawn with race as the primary motivation. That’s an argument that attorneys for the Secretary of State and the Florida Legislature made in court last week.

But attorneys for minority advocates, including the Black Voters Matter Power Building Institute, noted the 2015 map wasn’t on trial. Rather, DeSantis signed into law a map that replaced the prior district and left North Florida with only majority White districts. A Fair Districts amendment in the state constitution, approved by Florida voters in 2010, prohibits the cartography drawn to deny racial minorities equal opportunity for political participation.

“Voters should be empowered to pick their leaders, not the other way around. Today’s ruling reinforces the fact that Gov. DeSantis forced a compliant Legislature to adopt a gerrymandered congressional map that diminished minority representation, disenfranchised voters, and clearly violated the Fair District Amendments,” said Jasmine Burney-Clark, founder and consulting director of Equal Ground Education Fund, a plaintiff group.

“Rejection of this gerrymandered map was only made possible because Florida’s redistricting coalition legally challenged the Governor’s unconstitutional map. We applaud the judge’s ruling recognizing the need to restore the voting power of Black Floridians in North Florida, and paving the way for a map that empowers voters in that region to select a candidate of their choice. Floridians must not forget this racially motivated assault on our democracy. Our coalition will never waver in our continuing efforts to protect the voting rights of all Floridians.”

Marsh’s ruling won’t necessarily be the final word. The DeSantis’ administration said it intends to appeal the decision.

“We disagree with the trial court’s decision,” said Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd. “This is why the stipulation contemplates an appeal with pass through jurisdiction to the Florida Supreme Court, which we will be pursuing.”

In a stipulation agreement with plaintiffs, attorneys for the state conceded the existing map diminished the control of Black voters on congressional elections in North Florida. Plaintiffs suing over the map also agreed to focus only on North Florida’s districts. That left both sides in state court largely arguing over federal equal protection questions. The agreement between attorneys on both sides called for any appeal to be fast-tracked to the Florida Supreme Court.

Marsh signaled in a hearing last week a reluctance to rule the Florida Supreme Court has interpreted the constitution wrong. He also suggested the state’s arguments essentially asked him to rule that both the Fair Districts amendment and the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) violate the constitution. He rejected an argument that prior Supreme Court rulings forbidding the drawing of districts primarily on race apply to a challenge of the map DeSantis signed.

“Section 5 of the VRA (non-diminishment), by contrast, simply protects against backsliding in existing districts where a minority group has had the ability to elect a candidate of their choice,” Marsh wrote.

Since DeSantis inserted himself in the redistricting process, many observers suggested he desired a court fight that would reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The belief was a conservative majority on the federal bench would agree that lawmakers could not be required to preserve racial minority seats.

But rulings on congressional maps passed in other states show a different inclination. A 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court majority in June ruled Alabama lawmakers violated the U.S. Constitution by failing to draw more than one majority-Black congressional seat, and has ordered the Legislature to produce a new map. Weeks later, the court ruled Louisiana lawmakers must redraw that state’s map because it lacked minority representation.

Marsh cited the Alabama case in his ruling.

“The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Alabama’s ‘race-neutral benchmark’ theory,” Marsh wrote. “The Secretary can point to no case finding the non-diminishment language of the Fair Districts Amendment, nor the comparable Section 5 language of the Voting Rights Act, to violate the Equal Protection provision of the 14th Amendment.”

But he also said the state didn’t prove racial bias in many drawing anyway.

“Even if Defendants had standing to bring a racial gerrymandering challenge, and even if they could bring that challenge to a district that does not exist, and even if the lines of that district were predominantly drawn on the basis of race, Defendants’ claim would still fail because the drawing of such a district would be narrowly tailored to address a compelling state interest,” Marsh wrote.

Of note, DeSantis’ map resulted in the most heavily Republican congressional delegation in years, with 20 Republican representatives and just eight Democratic ones. Lawson last year ran in a GOP-leaning district but lost to fellow U.S. Rep. Neal Dunn, a Panama City Republican. Lawson has said he will seriously consider running again if a district similar to his old seat is drawn.

Meanwhile, this ruling could complicate the future of U.S. Rep. Aaron Bean, a Fernandina Beach Republican elected in November in a new majority Republican district in Northeast Florida.

Of note, the Florida Senate last year approved a congressional map that did retain a seat like Lawson’s. The full Legislature later approved a map that sought to create a different seat contained entirely within Duval County that would produce a Black Representative most of the time. But lawmakers also offered, in the event that courts determined the cartography diminished minority voting power, a secondary map that preserved a Gadsden-to-Duval seat.

DeSantis vetoed that redistricting plan. His own staff later produced a map and submitted it for consideration by the Legislature, which approved it in a Special Session.

181045906 Order by Jacob Ogles on Scribd