Q&A of the Day – Will Florida’s Congressional Map Withstand Legal Challenges?
Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.
Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com
Social: @brianmuddradio
iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.
Today’s Entry: Hi Brian, thank you for the continued well researched work you share with us daily. I would like for you to address the Supreme Court’s decision in striking down Alabama’s congressional map and whether that decision will impact Florida’s current congressional map.
Bottom Line: We are currently entering what are historically the peak Supreme Court decision weeks of the year. The weeks which often include the highest profile decisions that are rendered by the high court and that, for example, just last year resulted in the overturning of Roe v. Wade as the Court ruled in favor of Mississippi's abortion law. While last week’s ruling on Alabama’s congressional map isn’t among the highest profile cases pending before the court, as the decision is specific and limited to Alabama’s Congressional map which will now have to be redrawn. However, the reason the map was struck down in 5-4 decision has the attention of many in Florida, especially Democrats.
In recently striking down Alabama’s congressional map, the Court found Alabama in violation of the 1965 Voting Rights Act – which provides additional considerations for racial minorities in the redistricting process. Most specifically, Alabama’s Black population is 27% of the total state population, yet the current Congressional map has only one of seven Congressional districts, or 14%, drawn with a Black majority. A second majority Black congressional district would most closely align with the state’s demographics. That takes us to the questions in play with Florida’s map. As I outlined at the onset of the redistricting process last year...
While I think most Floridians would think geography would be the top consideration, independent of other factors, it’s not. And legally it can’t be. Under the Voting Rights Act, priority is given to the protection of racial minorities first, and geography second. What complicates it still further is another mandate which comes into play. The concepts of cracking and stacking. As part of the Tier 1 considerations under the Voting Rights Act, legislators can’t “crack” racial minorities by diluting their representation across multiple districts which might potentially mitigate their influence. At the same time, they can’t “stack” them, or over-populate districts with racial minorities – in what could be an effort to lump racial minorities unduly into districts with one another in an effort to mitigate their influence more broadly. If it sounds complicated, it is. That’s because each district must have approximately the same number of people, representing racial balance and then attempting to make geographical sense. Independent of actual gerrymandering efforts, the reason why maps/districts, will often include long slivers of people extending alongside other districts is a result of these factors.
In baseball a tie goes to the runner. One way of looking at redistricting under the Voting Rights Act is that ties, or subjectivity, are supposed to go to racial minorities. After Florida’s legislature had its previous congressional map struck down in court following the 2010 Census, the legislature’s produced map in Florida last year was very conservatively drawn. Not conservatively drawn as is in for the benefit of conservatives, but seemingly one that was exceedingly cautious to have any perceived benefit for Republicans within the state. Princeton’s Gerrymandering Project ID’d the Legislature’s map as being the least gerrymandered in the country at the time. Governor DeSantis felt the map could have been more aggressively drawn, vetoed the legislature’s map, drew his own and called a special session for the passage of his map. The most controversial aspect of the DeSantis drawn map was the majority black Congressional District in North Florida which had been represented by Al Lawson. The map was redrawn as a non-Black majority district and the seat flipped to Republicans in last November’s elections.
Legal challenges to Florida’s Congressional map are already outstanding as lawsuits were filed nearly as soon as DeSantis signed the redistricting map into law last year. In the context of the Alabama map and the Supreme Court ruling which struck it down, the focus on Florida’s map will be the former Al Lawson district. Florida’s Democrats, and their related supporters involved in the lawsuits, feel emboldened by the ruling on Alabama’s map and are increasingly confident Florida’s map won’t hold up to similar scrutiny. But is that optimism justified?
First and foremost, every map case stands on its own. A 5-4 ruling invoking the Voting Rights Act was cited in striking down Alabama’s map doesn’t mean every related challenge would result in a similar outcome. That said, the case that will be made will in part be this... In Florida there are currently two majority Black districts out of 28, or 7% of the districts. Florida’s Black population is currently 17%. On the surface, that looks similar to the Alabama situation. That said, Florida also has a Black representative from a majority White district in Byron Donalds resulting in the percentage of Black representatives from Florida standing at 11%. Law is all about interpretation and there’s a lot of subjectivity with all Congressional maps. It’s understandable why those seeking to overturn Florida’s Congressional map, feel emboldened following the recent Supreme Court decision. It’s also an oversimplification to suggest that Florida’s will automatically be struck down as well, as a result.