Florida Supreme Court upholds Gov. DeSantis’ controversial congressional map

The Florida Supreme Court has upheld a controversial congressional map drawn by Gov. Ron DeSantis and approved by the Legislature.

A majority of Justices ultimately said the Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Institute and other plaintiffs failed to prove racial discrimination or a need to preserve a North Florida district previously represented by a Black Democrat.

In a majority opinion, the group said the map will stand, ending any question about whether congressional district lines will change in the 2026 Midterms or the rest of the decade.

A majority opinion written by Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz accepted DeSantis’ past arguments that the Equal Protection Clause in the U.S. Constitution overrides a demand in Florida’s Fair Districts language that the power of minority voters cannot be diminished in the redistricting process.

“The Legislature’s obligation to comply with the Equal Protection Clause is superior to its obligation to comply with the Non-Diminishment Clause as interpreted by our Court,” he wrote. “The plaintiffs did not prove the possibility of complying with both the Non-Diminishment Clause and the Equal Protection Clause in North Florida. Therefore, they did not meet their burden to prove the invalidity of the Enacted Plan.”

Plaintiffs criticized the decision.

“Today is another dark day in the history of Florida. With today’s ruling, the Florida Supreme Court has turned its back on Black voters, the state constitution, and the fundamental principles of representative democracy,” said Genesis Robinson, Executive Director of Equal Ground, one of the groups challenging the map.

“By allowing a map that clearly diminishes Black voting power to stand in a 5-1 decision, the Court has sent a chilling message: the constitutional rights of Black Floridians are negotiable, and the will of the people can be ignored, even when it is written into the very fabric of our laws. At the heart of this case was a basic question: Do Black Floridians have the right to fair representation in Congress? Today, the Court answered with a resounding no.”

But DeSantis said the ruling vindicated his positions.

“This was always the constitutionally correct map — and now both the federal courts and the Florida Supreme Court have upheld it,” he posted on social media.

At the circuit court level, plaintiffs agreed to forgo a trial and adopt an agreement with attorneys for the state to ask courts to just rule on issues surrounding the dismantling of a prior configuration of Florida’s 5th Congressional District. That was a seat previously represented by U.S. Rep. Al Lawson, a Black Democrat.

“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. The plaintiffs were required to produce an alternative plan proving that any asserted defect in the Legislature’s plan is remediable,” the opinion reads.

DeSantis criticized the Lawson district, which spanned from Tallahassee to Jacksonville in order to make a district where Black voters controlled the outcome of the election. DeSantis ultimately vetoed a map created by the Legislature that included a Jacksonville area district with a substantial number of Black voters instead. Lawmakers had also offered another map largely preserving Lawson’s district if courts found the map diminished minority voting power.

DeSantis later submitted his own map, which the Legislature passed. It led to Florida Republicans netting four U.S. House seats in the 2022 election. Lawson, forced to run in a majority Republican seat, lost to fellow U.S. Rep. Neal Dunn, a White Republican.

But Justices ultimately ruled that there was never a need for Lawson’s district to be drawn in the first place. The district notably was created by the Supreme Court in 2016 when different Justices ruled that the map created by a Republican Legislature in 2012 wrongly favored Republicans despite passage of the Fair Districts amendment.

“In fairness, we acknowledge our Court’s role in leading the trial court astray. Benchmark CD 5 originated in an order from our Court, and the things that make the Plan 8015 remedial district race-predominant are equally true of Benchmark CD 5,” the opinion reads.

Justice Jorge Labarga did write a dissenting opinion from the majority.

“The majority generally does not dispute this conclusion,” Labarga wrote.

“And yet, despite the majority’s agreement that the Enacted Plan diminishes the ability of black voters in Benchmark CD 5 to elect representatives of their choice — thus, the Enacted Plan violates the Fair Districts Amendment (FDA) approved by Florida voters in 2010 — the majority ultimately concludes that no relief is warranted in this case because the Plan 8015 remedial district violates the Equal Protection Clause.”

Labarga argued that at the very least, if the majority believes plaintiffs should have offered an alternative map to make their case, the matter should be remanded to a lower court so that can occur.

Equal Ground said the majority’s refusal to do so was inherently discriminatory.

“This is not just a legal setback, it is a direct attack on Black political power and a decision that will have ripple effects for generations,” Robinson said. “It cements an unjust political advantage and further erodes trust in our institutions.”

The group also raised concerns that the ruling comes days after DeSantis encouraged President Donald Trump to conduct a mid-decade Census and reapportionment in hopes of allotting Florida more seats. The court decision would allow DeSantis another shot at drawing a map with the knowledge the court intended no Fair Districts guardrails to apply.