Appellate judges appear receptive to Gov. DeSantis’ redistricting argument

At least some appellate judges hearing a challenge to Florida’s congressional maps seemed receptive to the state’s defense.

The full bench for the 1st District Court of Appeal took up the redistricting case after Leon Circuit Judge Lee Marsh threw out Florida’s map. Marsh in September ruled the map in place now violates provisions of the state constitution

But multiple appellate judges, at least in questioning of plaintiffs, adopted Gov. Ron DeSantis’ argument that a prior North Florida district was wrongly drawn motivated by race. But attorneys questioning the map said that’s not the map on trial, and maintained the political boundaries crafted by DeSantis’ Office illegally diminished the political power of Black voters.

Appellate Judge Brad Thomas challenged plaintiff assertions that the state needed to preserve a district put in place by the Florida Supreme Court in 2015 that stretched from Tallahassee to Jacksonville. He suggested that draw would have failed the so-called Gingles test, which suggests a minority-performing district should only be drawn to protect a compact community.

“You are running away from Gingles because you know you can’t establish that,” he said.

Jyoti Jasrasaria, the attorney for Black Voters Matter and other plaintiffs challenging the map, stressed that the former district wasn’t before the court. The lawsuit challenging the map asserts the lines ultimately signed by DeSantis diminish the ability of Black voters in North Florida to elect a congressional Representative of their choice, explicitly violating the Fair Districts amendment approved by Florida voters in 2010.

When the redistricting process kicked off in Florida in late 2021, attorneys for the Legislature also advised lawmakers to respect the map put in place by the Florida Supreme Court in 2015. The high court nearly a decade ago ruled the Legislature in the last round of redistricting had violated Fair Districts by favoring Republican interests and also drawing a map designed to protect former Democratic U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown.

Under that map, Brown lost in a Democratic Primary to former U.S. Rep. Al Lawson in 2016, and Lawson held the seat until the map designed by DeSantis went into effect.

The Legislature initially aimed to craft cartography largely preserving Lawson’s district, which ran from Gadsden County — Florida’s only Black-majority county — to urban areas of Jacksonville. But DeSantis objected, saying the district, which never had a majority Black population overall, violated the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause.

The Legislature ultimately approved a district that left a Duval County-only district where analysts said Black voters would control the outcome most of the time. But DeSantis vetoed that map. Ultimately, the Legislature approved a map drawn by DeSantis’ now-acting Chief of Staff, Alex Kelly.

That map was in place in 2022, when Lawson was forced to run in a majority White, majority Republican district against fellow incumbent U.S. Rep. Neal Dunn, a Panama City Republican. Lawson lost.

Marsh in September said he was bound by Florida Supreme Court precedent. He also suggested the state’s defense of the map challenged more than 50 years of court precedent interpreting the federal Voting Rights Act.

But attorneys for the state seemed to find a more receptive argument in front of the appellate court.

Notably, the state was represented by attorneys who once advised the Legislature to preserve the former Lawson seat. Those attorneys now argue that move would have been unconstitutional. Dan Nordby, an attorney for the Florida Senate, said no one ever presented a justification for drawing that seat that was not led first by race.

Parties in the case have requested appellate judges to rule by Nov. 22. That would provide enough time for the Florida Supreme Court to hear the matter and rule before the conclusion of the Regular Legislative Session on March 8. Marsh’s ruling calls for the Legislature to draw new lines that comply with the Fair Districts Amendment.

Of note, arguments similar to those put forward by DeSantis have not been so well received by the U.S. Supreme Court, which could eventually hear the challenge to Florida’s map as well. Earlier this year, the federal court rejected Alabama’s congressional map on grounds it violated the Voting Rights Act, and ordered the state to craft a new map with an additional Black-performing seat.